What Do Eye Gaze Metrics Tell Us about Motor Imagery?

Elodie Poiroux, Christine Cavaro-Ménard, Stéphanie Leruez, Jean Michel Lemée, Isabelle Richard, Mickael Dinomais
Author Information
  1. Elodie Poiroux: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Laboratoire Angevin de Recherche en Ingénierie des Systèmes (LARIS), EA 7315 F-49000, Angers, France.
  2. Christine Cavaro-Ménard: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Laboratoire Angevin de Recherche en Ingénierie des Systèmes (LARIS), EA 7315 F-49000, Angers, France.
  3. Stéphanie Leruez: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Laboratoire Angevin de Recherche en Ingénierie des Systèmes (LARIS), EA 7315 F-49000, Angers, France.
  4. Jean Michel Lemée: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Département de Neurochirurgie, CHU d'Angers, 4 rue Larrey, 49933, Angers, Cedex 9, France.
  5. Isabelle Richard: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Département de Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation, CHU d'Angers, 4 rue Larrey, 49933, Angers, Cedex 9, France.
  6. Mickael Dinomais: LUNAM, Université d'Angers, Laboratoire Angevin de Recherche en Ingénierie des Systèmes (LARIS), EA 7315 F-49000, Angers, France.

Abstract

Many of the brain structures involved in performing real movements also have increased activity during imagined movements or during motor observation, and this could be the neural substrate underlying the effects of motor imagery in motor learning or motor rehabilitation. In the absence of any objective physiological method of measurement, it is currently impossible to be sure that the patient is indeed performing the task as instructed. Eye gaze recording during a motor imagery task could be a possible way to "spy" on the activity an individual is really engaged in. The aim of the present study was to compare the pattern of eye movement metrics during motor observation, visual and kinesthetic motor imagery (VI, KI), target fixation, and mental calculation. Twenty-two healthy subjects (16 females and 6 males), were required to perform tests in five conditions using imagery in the Box and Block Test tasks following the procedure described by Liepert et al. Eye movements were analysed by a non-invasive oculometric measure (SMI RED250 system). Two parameters describing gaze pattern were calculated: the index of ocular mobility (saccade duration over saccade + fixation duration) and the number of midline crossings (i.e. the number of times the subjects gaze crossed the midline of the screen when performing the different tasks). Both parameters were significantly different between visual imagery and kinesthesic imagery, visual imagery and mental calculation, and visual imagery and target fixation. For the first time we were able to show that eye movement patterns are different during VI and KI tasks. Our results suggest gaze metric parameters could be used as an objective unobtrusive approach to assess engagement in a motor imagery task. Further studies should define how oculomotor parameters could be used as an indicator of the rehabilitation task a patient is engaged in.

References

  1. Neuroimage. 2012 Feb 1;59(3):2798-807 [PMID: 22005592]
  2. Neuroimage. 2009 Jul 1;46(3):844-53 [PMID: 19285143]
  3. Stroke. 2007 Apr;38(4):1293-7 [PMID: 17332444]
  4. J Rehabil Med. 2015 Mar;47(3):204-9 [PMID: 25403275]
  5. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Feb;89(2):311-9 [PMID: 18226656]
  6. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998 Apr;106(4):283-96 [PMID: 9741757]
  7. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Mar 09;7:123 [PMID: 16526949]
  8. Science. 1971 Jan 22;171(3968):308-11 [PMID: 5538847]
  9. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Sep;85(9):1403-8 [PMID: 15375808]
  10. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Nov;7(11):498-504 [PMID: 14585447]
  11. Stroke. 2006 Jul;37(7):1941-52 [PMID: 16741183]
  12. J Cogn Neurosci. 2003 Apr 1;15(3):315-23 [PMID: 12729485]
  13. Vision Res. 1971 Sep;11(9):929-42 [PMID: 5133265]
  14. J Cogn Neurosci. 1997 Jan;9(1):27-38 [PMID: 23968178]
  15. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 Jul-Aug;22(4):330-40 [PMID: 18326057]
  16. Neuroimage. 2010 Apr 15;50(3):1148-67 [PMID: 20056149]
  17. Hum Brain Mapp. 2001 Jan;12(1):1-19 [PMID: 11198101]
  18. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Sep 19;7:576 [PMID: 24065903]
  19. Brain. 2011 May;134(Pt 5):1373-86 [PMID: 21515905]
  20. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2005 Dec 15;50(2):387-97 [PMID: 16271398]
  21. Psychol Rev. 1968 Nov;75(6):466-77 [PMID: 4973669]
  22. PLoS One. 2013 Jun 25;8(6):e67761 [PMID: 23825683]
  23. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Sep 24;7:604 [PMID: 24068996]
  24. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1987 Jun;116(2):172-91 [PMID: 2955072]
  25. Curr Biol. 2008 Oct 28;18(20):1576-80 [PMID: 18948009]
  26. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1996 Mar;3(2):87-93 [PMID: 8713549]
  27. J Neurophysiol. 2010 Nov;104(5):2375-88 [PMID: 20810686]
  28. PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e24728 [PMID: 21931832]
  29. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e42742 [PMID: 22880095]
  30. Neuropsychologia. 1995 Nov;33(11):1419-32 [PMID: 8584178]
  31. Front Psychol. 2013 Dec 18;4:948 [PMID: 24391611]
  32. Eur J Neurosci. 2014 Jan;39(2):287-94 [PMID: 24438491]
  33. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013 Jun;37(5):930-49 [PMID: 23583615]
  34. Neuroimage. 2001 Jul;14(1 Pt 2):S103-9 [PMID: 11373140]
  35. Psychol Res. 2001 Nov;65(4):235-41 [PMID: 11789427]
  36. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005 Jan;17(1):97-112 [PMID: 15701242]
  37. Neuroscience. 2011 Nov 10;195:37-44 [PMID: 21884759]
  38. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014 Mar-Apr;58(2):226-30 [PMID: 24275122]
  39. J Neurosci. 1996 Dec 1;16(23):7688-98 [PMID: 8922425]
  40. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Aug 22;8:66 [PMID: 25202241]
  41. Nature. 2003 Aug 14;424(6950):769-71 [PMID: 12917683]
  42. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2010 Jun;7(2):249-57 [PMID: 18955294]
  43. J Cogn Neurosci. 2003 Nov 15;15(8):1244-59 [PMID: 14709240]
  44. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2013 Apr;56(3):157-73 [PMID: 23415992]
  45. Phys Ther. 2001 Aug;81(8):1455-62 [PMID: 11509075]
  46. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37850 [PMID: 22693579]
  47. Cereb Cortex. 2004 Nov;14(11):1246-55 [PMID: 15166100]
  48. Brain Cogn. 2012 Oct;80(1):83-8 [PMID: 22647575]
  49. Brain. 2003 Jun;126(Pt 6):1460-73 [PMID: 12764065]
  50. J Mot Behav. 2005 Jan;37(1):10-20 [PMID: 15642689]
  51. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2002 Nov;34(4):539-48 [PMID: 12564558]
  52. J Rehabil Med. 2014 Oct;46(9):843-8 [PMID: 25182189]
  53. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Jun;87(6):842-52 [PMID: 16731221]
  54. Brain Res. 2008 Jan 2;1187:95-102 [PMID: 18035337]
  55. J Neurosci. 2011 May 11;31(19):6972-81 [PMID: 21562259]
  56. Phys Ther. 2007 Jul;87(7):942-53 [PMID: 17472948]
  57. Behav Brain Res. 2008 Mar 5;187(2):351-60 [PMID: 17977607]
  58. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Jun 30;8:54 [PMID: 25071482]
  59. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994 Aug;20(4):709-30 [PMID: 8083630]
  60. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 Jun;26(5):470-8 [PMID: 22247502]

MeSH Term

Adult
Eye Movements
Female
Humans
Imagination
Male
Middle Aged
Vision, Ocular
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0imagerymotortaskgazevisualparametersperformingmovementsEyefixationtasksdifferentactivityobservationrehabilitationobjectivepatientengagedpatterneyemovementVIKItargetmentalcalculationsubjectssaccadedurationnumbermidlineusedManybrainstructuresinvolvedrealalsoincreasedimaginedneuralsubstrateunderlyingeffectslearningabsencephysiologicalmethodmeasurementcurrentlyimpossiblesureindeedinstructedrecordingpossibleway"spy"individualreallyaimpresentstudycomparemetricskinestheticTwenty-twohealthy16females6malesrequiredperformtestsfiveconditionsusingBoxBlockTestfollowingproceduredescribedLiepertetalanalysednon-invasiveoculometricmeasureSMIRED250systemTwodescribingcalculated:indexocularmobility+crossingsietimescrossedscreensignificantlykinesthesicfirsttimeableshowpatternsresultssuggestmetricunobtrusiveapproachassessengagementstudiesdefineoculomotorindicatorGazeMetricsTellUsMotorImagery?

Similar Articles

Cited By