Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T06:58:36.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of attention and age on the occurrence of mirror movements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2005

YASMIN BALIZ ,
CHRISTINE ARMATAS ,
MAREE FARROW ,
KATE E. HOY ,
PAUL B. FITZGERALD ,
JOHN L. BRADSHAW  and
NELLIE GEORGIOU-KARISTIANIS
YASMIN BALIZ
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
CHRISTINE ARMATAS
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
MAREE FARROW
Affiliation:
Experimental Neuropsychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
KATE E. HOY
Affiliation:
Experimental Neuropsychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred, Prahran, and Department of Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
PAUL B. FITZGERALD
Affiliation:
Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, The Alfred, Prahran, and Department of Psychological Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
JOHN L. BRADSHAW
Affiliation:
Experimental Neuropsychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
NELLIE GEORGIOU-KARISTIANIS
Affiliation:
Experimental Neuropsychology Research Unit, Department of Psychology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study utilised a finger force task to investigate the influence of attention and age on the occurrence of motor overflow in the form of mirror movements in neurologically intact adults. Forty right-handed participants were recruited from three age groups: 20–30 years, 40–50 years, and 60–70 years. Participants were required to maintain a target force using both their index and middle fingers, representing 50% of their maximum strength capacity for that hand. Attention was directed to a hand by activating a bone conduction vibrator attached to the small finger of that hand. Based on Cabeza's (2002) model of hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults, it was hypothesised that mirror movements would increase with age. Furthermore, it was expected that when the attentional demands of the task were increased, motor overflow occurrence would be exacerbated for the older adult group. The results obtained provide support for the model, and qualified support for the hypothesis that increasing the attentional demands of a task results in greater motor overflow. It is proposed that the association between mirror movements and age observed in this study may result from an age-related increase in bihemispheric activation that occurs in older adults, who, unlike younger adults, benefit from bihemispheric processing for task performance. (JINS, 2005, 11, 855–862.)

Keywords

AgingCorpus callosumMotor cortexMotor skillsCorticospinal tractMovement disorders
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 11 , Issue 7 , November 2005 , pp. 855 - 862
Copyright
© 2005 The International Neuropsychological Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abercombie, M., Lindon, R., & Tyson, M. (1964). Associated movements in normal and physically handicapped children. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 6, 573–580.Google Scholar
Aboitiz, F., Scheibel, A.B., Fisher, R.S., & Zaidel, E. (1992). Fibre composition of the human corpus callosum. Brain Research, 598, 143–153.Google Scholar
Allen, L.S., Richey, M.F., Chai, Y.M., & Gorski, R.A. (1991). Sex differences in the corpus callosum of the living human being. The Journal of Neuroscience, 11, 933–942.Google Scholar
Aranyi, Z. & Rosler, K.M. (2002). Effort-induced mirror movements: A study of transcallosal inhibition in humans. Experimental Brain Research, 145, 76–82.Google Scholar
Armatas, C.A., Summers, J.J., & Bradshaw, J.L. (1994). Mirror movements in normal adult subjects. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 16, 405–413.Google Scholar
Armatas, C.A., Summers, J.J., & Bradshaw, J.L. (1996a). Strength as a factor influencing mirror movements. Human Movement Science, 15, 689–705.Google Scholar
Armatas, C.A., Summers, J.J., & Bradshaw, J.L. (1996b). Handedness and performance variability as factors influencing mirror movement occurrence. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 18, 823–835.Google Scholar
Bauman, G. (1932). Absence of the cervical spine: Klippel-Feil Syndrome. Journal of the American Medical Association, 98, 129–132.Google Scholar
Beck, A.T., Ward, C.H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 53–63.Google Scholar
Bodwell, J.A., Mahurin, R.K., Waddle, S., Price, R., & Cramer, S.C. (2003). Age and features of movement influence motor overflow. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51, 1735–1739.Google Scholar
Cabeza, R. (2002). Hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults: The HAROLD model. Psychology and Aging, 17, 85–100.Google Scholar
Calautti, C., Serrati, C., & Baron, J.C. (2001). Effects of age on brain activation during auditory-cued thumb-to-index opposition: A positron emission tomography study. Stroke, 32, 139–146.Google Scholar
Cernacek, J. (1961). Contralateral motor irradiation—cerebral dominance. Archives of Neurology, 4, 61–68.Google Scholar
Cheyne, D., Weinberg, H., Gaetz, W., & Jantzen, K.J. (1995). Motor cortex activity and predicting side of movement: Neuronal network and dipole of premovement magnetic fields. Neuroscience Letters, 188, 81–84.Google Scholar
Cincotta, M., Borgheresi, A., Ragazzoni, P., Vanni, P., Balestrieri, F., Benvenuti, F., Zaccara, G., Arnetoli, G., & Ziemann, U. (2003). Separate ipsilateral and contralateral corticospinal projections in congenital mirror movements: Neurophysiological evidence and significance for motor rehabilitation. Movement Disorders, 18, 1294–1300.Google Scholar
Connolly, K. & Stratton, P. (1968). Developmental changes in associated movements. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 10, 49–56.Google Scholar
Cowell, P.E., Allen, L.S., Zalatimo, N.S., & Denenberg, V.H. (1992). A developmental study of sex and age interactions in the human corpus callosum. Developmental Brain Research, 66, 187–192.Google Scholar
Craik, F.I.M. (1986). A functional account of age differences in memory. In F. Lix & H. Hagendord (Eds.), Human memory and cognitive capabilities, mechanisms, and performances (pp. 409–422). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Cramer, S.C., Finklestein, S.P., Schaechter, J.D., Bush, G., & Rosen, B.R. (1999). Activation of distinct motor cortex regions during ipsilateral and contralateral finger movements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 74, 383–387.Google Scholar
de Lacoste-Utamsing, C. & Holloway, R.L. (1982). Sexual dimorphism in the human corpus callosum. Science, 216, 1431–1432.Google Scholar
Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E., & McHugh, P.R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.Google Scholar
Georgiou-Karistianis, N., Hoy, K., Bradshaw, J., Farrow, M., Chiu, E., Churchyard, A., Fitzgerald, P., & Armatas, C. (2004). Motor overflow in Huntington's disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 75, 904–906.Google Scholar
Heck, A.F. (1964). A study of neural and extraneural findings in a large family with Friedreich's ataxia. Journal of Neurological Sciences, 1, 226–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoy, K., Fitzgerald, P., Bradshaw, J., Armatas, C., Farrow, M., Brown, T., & Georgiou-Karistianis, N. (2004a). Motor overflow in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research, 125, 129–137.Google Scholar
Hoy, K., Fitzgerald, P., Bradshaw, J., Armatas, C., & Georgiou-Karistianis, N. (2004b). Investigating the cortical origins of motor overflow. Brain Research Reviews, 46, 315–327.Google Scholar
Ikeda, A., Luders, H.O., Burgess, R.C., & Shibasaki, H. (1992). Movement related potentials recorded from supplementary motor area and primary motor area. Brain, 115, 1017–1043.Google Scholar
La Mantia, A.S. & Rakic, P. (1990). Cytological and quantitative characteristics of four cerebral commissures in the rhesus monkey. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 291, 520–537.Google Scholar
Liederman, J. & Foley, L.M. (1987). A modified finger lift test reveals an asymmetry of motor overflow in adults. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 9, 498–510.Google Scholar
Maegaki, Y., Seki, A., Suzaki, I., Sugihara, S., Ogawa, T., Amisaki, T., Fukuda, C., & Koeda, T. (2002). Congenital mirror movement: A study of functional MRI and transcranial magnetic stimulation. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 44, 838–843.Google Scholar
Mattay, V.S., Fera, F., Tessitore, A., Hariri, A.R., Das, S., Callicott, J.H., & Weingerger, D.R. (2002). Neurophysiological correlates of age-related changes in human motor function. Neurology, 58, 630–635.Google Scholar
Mayston, M.J., Harrison, L.M., & Stephens, J.A. (1999). A neurophysiological study of mirror movements in adults and children. Annals of Neurology, 45, 583–594.Google Scholar
Nakada, T., Fujii, Y., Suzuki, K., & Kwee, I.L. (1998). High-field (3.0T) functional MRI sequential epoch analysis: An example for motion control analysis. Neuroscience Research, 32, 355–362.Google Scholar
Nass, R. (1985). Mirror movement asymmetries in congenital hemiparesis: The inhibition hypothesis revisited. Neurology, 35, 1059–1062.Google Scholar
Oldfield, R.C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.Google Scholar
Regli, F., Filippa, G., & Wiesendanger, M. (1967). Hereditary mirror movements. Archives of Neurology, 16, 620–623.Google Scholar
Reitz, M. & Muller, K. (1998). Differences between “congenital mirror movements” and “associated movements” in normal children: A neurophysiological case study. Neuroscience Letters, 256, 69–72.Google Scholar
Sohn, Y.H., Jung, H.Y., & Kaelin-Lang, A. (2003). Excitability of the ipsilateral motor cortex during phasic voluntary hand movement. Experimental Brain Research, 148, 176–185.Google Scholar
Somers, A.B., Levin, H.S., & Hannay, H.J. (1976). A neuropsychological study of a family with hereditary mirror movements. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 18, 791–798.Google Scholar
Stern, J.A., Gold, S., Hoine, H., & Barocas, V.S. (1976). Towards a more refined analysis of the overflow or associated movement phenomenon. In D.V.S. Sankar (Ed.), Mental Health in Children, Vol. 11 (pp. 113–128). New York: PJD Publications Ltd.
Todor, J.I. & Lazarus, J.C. (1986). Exertion level and the intensity of associated movements. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 28, 205–212.Google Scholar
Tomasch, J. (1954). Size, distribution and number of fibres in the human corpus callosum. The Anatomical Record, 119, 119–135.Google Scholar
van den Berg, C., Beek, P.J., Waganarr, R.C., & van Wieringen, P.C.W. (2000). Coordination disorders in patients with Parkinson's disease: A study of paced rhythmic forearm movements. Experimental Brain Research, 134, 174–186.Google Scholar
Witelson, S.F. (1985). The brain connection: The corpus callosum is larger in left-handers. Science, 229, 665–668.Google Scholar
Yensen, R. (1965). A factor influencing motor overflow. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 20, 967–968.Google Scholar
Ziemann, U., Ishii, K., Borgheresi, A., Yaseen, Z., Battaglia, F., Hallet, M., Cincotta, M., Wassermann, E.M. (1999). Dissociation of the pathways mediating ipsilateral and contralateral motor evoked potentials in human hand and arm muscles. Journal of Physiology (London), 518, 895–906.Google Scholar