4.5 Article

Alpha coherence predicts accuracy during a visuomotor tracking task

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 49, 期 13, 页码 3704-3709

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.026

关键词

EEG; Oscillation; Synchronicity; Power; Performance; Integration

资金

  1. German Research Council Collaborative Research Center 550 [A13]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been shown that synchrony of neuronal oscillations plays a critical role in effective communication between functionally distinct brain areas involving motor-sensory integration. However, the patterns of cortico-cortical coupling and their relation to behavioural success are widely unknown. Here, we analysed changes in cortico-cortical coherence during an unimanual visuomotor task and their correlation with performance. A 28-channel-EEC was attained in 27 healthy subjects during the tracking of an irregularly fluctuating target on a screen by manipulating a force sensor with the right index finger and thumb. For oscillatory power in the alpha (8-12 Hz) and the lower beta-band (betal, 13-20 Hz), we found a decrease in central and occipital areas during performance. Interregional coherence between contralateral frontal and central areas was enhanced in the alpha band. In betal, we observed a marked increase of coherence in centroparietal regions of both hemispheres extending to occipital and frontal regions in beta2 (21-30 Hz). Most prominently, correlation analysis between alpha coherence and performance accuracy indicated that higher occipitocentral (i.e. visuomotor) coherence is associated with better visuomotor performance whereas high tracking error is associated with enhanced frontocentral coupling, suggesting additional activation of a frontoparietal control network. These results provide further evidence that coherent brain oscillations in alpha and beta bands significantly contribute to effective functional integration of visual and motor areas. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据