Umeå University's logo

Motor issues are frequently observed accompanying core deficits in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Impaired motor behavior has also been linked to cognitive and social abnormalities, and problems with predictive ability have been suggested to play an important, possibly shared, part across all these domains. Brain imaging of sensory-motor behavior is a promising method for characterizing the neurobiological foundation for this proposed key trait. The present functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) developmental study, involving children/youth with ASD, typically developing (TD) children/youth, and neurotypical adults, will investigate brain activations during execution and observation of a visually guided, goal-directed sequential (two-step) manual task. Neural processing related to both execution and observation of the task, as well as activation patterns during the preparation stage before execution/observation will be investigated. Main regions of interest include frontoparietal and occipitotemporal cortical areas, the human mirror neuron system (MNS), and the cerebellum.

Motor issues are frequently observed accompanying core deficits in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Impaired motor behavior has also been linked to cognitive and social abnormalities, and problems with predictive ability have been suggested to play an important, possibly shared, part across all these domains. Brain imaging of sensory-motor behavior is a promising method for characterizing the neurobiological foundation for this proposed key trait. The present functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) developmental study, involving children/youth with ASD, typically developing (TD) children/youth, and neurotypical adults, will investigate brain activations during execution and observation of a visually guided, goal-directed sequential (two-step) manual task. Neural processing related to both execution and observation of the task, as well as activation patterns during the preparation stage before execution/observation will be investigated. Main regions of interest include frontoparietal and occipitotemporal cortical areas, the human mirror neuron system (MNS), and the cerebellum.

In everyday behavior, we perform numerous goal-directed manual tasks that contain a sequence of actions. However, knowledge is limited regarding developmental aspects of predictive control mechanisms in such tasks, particularly with regard to brain activations supporting sequential manual actions in children. We investigated these issues in typically developing children at early adolescence (11–14 years) compared with previously collected data from adults. While lying in a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner, the participants steered a cursor on a computer screen towards sequentially presented targets using a hand-held manipulandum. The next target was either revealed after completion of the ongoing target (one-target condition), in which case forthcoming movements could not be planned ahead, or displayed in advance (two-target condition), which allowed the use of a predictive control strategy. The adults completed more targets in the two- than one-target condition, displaying an efficient predictive control strategy. The children, in contrast, completed fewer targets in the two- than one-target condition, and difficulties implementing a predictive strategy were found due to a limited capacity to inhibit premature movements. Brain areas with increased activation in children, compared with the adults, included prefrontal and posterior parietal regions, suggesting an increased demand for higher-level cognitive processing in the children due to inhibitory challenges. Thus, regarding predictive mechanisms during sequential manual tasks, crucial development likely occurs beyond early adolescence. This is at a later age than what has previously been reported from other manual tasks, suggesting that predictive phase transitions are difficult to master.

Most everyday manual tasks, like grabbing a cup of coffee to drink, are comprised of a sequence of action phases. Efficient phase transitions, or linking, are achieved using a predictive control policy where motor commands for the next phase are specified and released in anticipation of sensory confirmation of goal completion of the current phase. If there is a discrepancy between predicted and actual sensory feedback about goal completion, corrective actions are employed to complete the current action phase before proceeding to the next. However, we lack understanding about brain activations supporting such predictive linking and corrective actions in manual tasks. In this study, during 3-T MRI-scanning, sixteen participants (5 males, 11 females; mean age 27.3 years, range 23–37) performed a sequential manual task, with or without the possibility for predictive linking. We found that predictive linking of action phases was associated with increased activation in a network that included right-sided fronto-parietal areas related to visuospatial attention, eye movements and motor planning, left-sided parietal areas related to implicit timing and shifts of motor attention, occipital regions bilaterally reflecting visual processing related to the attended next target, and finally, the anterior midcingulate cortex involved in continuous performance monitoring. Corrective actions were associated with increased activation in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex involved in reestablishing executive control over previously automatized behavior.

Many manual tasks involve object manipulation and are achieved by an evolving series of actions, or action phases, recruited to achieve task subgoals. The ability to effectively link action phases is an important component of manual dexterity. However, our understanding of how the effective linking of sequential action phases develops with skill learning is limited. Here, we addressed this issue using a task in which participants applied forces to a handle to move a cursor on a computer screen to successively acquire visual targets. Target acquisition required actively holding the cursor within the target zone (hold phase) for a required duration, before moving to the next target (transport phase). If the transport phase was initiated prematurely, before the end of the required hold duration, participants had to return to the target to acquire it. The goal was to acquire targets as quickly as possible. Distinct visual and auditory sensory events marked goal completion of each action phase. During initial task performance, the transport phase was reactively triggered by sensory events signaling hold phase completion. However, with practice, participants learned to initiate the transport phase based on a prediction of the time of hold phase completion. Simulations revealed that participants learned to near-optimally compensate for temporal uncertainty, presumably related to estimation of time intervals and execution of motor commands, so as to reduce the average latency between the end of the required hold phase duration and the start of the transport phase, while avoiding an excess of premature exits.

Most manual tasks comprise a sequence of action phases. Skill acquisition in such tasks involves a transition from reactive control, whereby motor commands for the next phase are triggered by sensory events signaling completion of the current phase, to predictive control, whereby commands for the next phase are launched in anticipation of these events. Here we investigated gaze behavior associated with such learning. Participants moved a cursor to successively acquire visual targets, as quickly as possible, by actively keeping the cursor within the target zone (hold phase) for a required duration, before moving to the next target (transport phase). Distinct visual and auditory events marked completion of each phase and, with learning, the launching of the transport phase shifted from being reactively to predictively controlled. Initially, gaze was directed to the current target throughout the hold phase, allowing visual feedback control of the cursor position, and shifted to the next target in synchrony with the cursor. However, with learning, two distinct gaze behaviors emerged. Gaze either shifted to the next target well before the end of the hold phase, facilitating planning of the forthcoming cursor movement, or shifted to the next target after the cursor, enabling cursor exits to be monitored in central vision. These results suggest that, with learning, gaze behavior changes to support evolving task demands, and that people distribute different gaze behaviors across repetitions of the task.