عصب روان شناسی

با همکاری مشترک دانشگاه پیام نور و انجمن عصب روان‌شناسی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تأثیر الگوی شنیداری و دیداری بر سرکوب ریتم میو در شوت سه‌گام بسکتبال

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه آموزشی رفتار حرکتی- دانشکده علوم ورزشی- دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی- تهران- ایران

2 دکترای تخصصی رفتار حرکتی دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

هدف: هدف از اجرای پژوهش حاضر، تعیین تأثیر الگوی شنیداری و دیداری بر سرکوب ریتم میو در شوت سه‌گام بسکتبال بود. روش: 13 نفر از دانشجویان تربیت بدنی دانشگاه شهید رجایی تهران به صورت داوطلبانه در این پژوهش شرکت کردند. ترتیب مشاهده الگوی بینایی و الگوی شنیداری، در بین شرکت‌کنندگان به صورت موازنه متقابل کنترل شد. شرکت‌کنندگان به طور تصادفی در دو گروه قرار گرفتند: گروه اول، ابتدا الگوی بینایی را مشاهده و سپس الگوی شنیداری مربوط به صدای اجرای شوت سه گام بسکتبال را دریافت کردند و گروه دوم، الگوی بینایی را پس از الگوی شنیداری مشاهده و در نهایت هر دو گروه الگوی ترکیبی را مشاهده کردند. امواج مغزی شرکت‌کنندگان در سه حالت، توسط دستگاه الکتروانسفالوگرافی ثبت و توسط نرم-افزار نروگاید به داده‌های کمی تبدیل شد. یافته ها: نتایج آزمون تحلیل واریانس دوراهه با اندازه های تکراری در یک طرح (منطقه عصبی)3 × (نوع الگو)3 نشان داد اثر اصلی منطقه عصبی معنادار است، به این‌معنی که، ریتم میو در منطقه CZ به طور معناداری سرکوب بیشتری نسبت به منطقه 3C داشته است (014/0= P). علاوه بر این، نتایج نشان دادند که ریتم میو در منطقه CZ به طور معناداری سرکوب بیشتری نسبت به منطقه عصبی 3C در هر دو حالت مشاهده الگوی بینایی (025/0= P) و بینایی- شنیداری (014/0= P) داشته است، درحالیکه بین ریتم میو در حالت الگوی شنیداری بین سه منطقه مذکور تفاوت معناداری مشاهده نشد. نتیجه‌گیری: یکپارچگی بینایی شنوایی سبب سرکوب بیشتری در ریتم میو و در نتیجه فعال‌سازی نورون های آینه ای می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effects of Audio-Visual Modeling on the mu Rhythm Suppression in Basketball Lay-Up Shot

نویسندگان [English]

  • Farzaneh Hatami 1
  • Akram Kavyani 2

1 Associate Professor of Motor Behavior Departmrnt, Sport Sciences Faculty, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran

2 PhD in motor behavior, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Aim: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of audio-visual modeling on mu rhythm suppression in basketball lay-up shot. Method: For this purpose, 13 physical education students of Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University participated voluntarily in this study. Order of presenting visual and auditory stimuli was counter-balanced among participants. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: the first group, observed the visual stimulus model first, then received the auditory stimulus, and the second group received the visual stimulus after the auditory stimulus and eventually presented the audio-visual stimuli. Brain waves were recorded by EEG in three conditions, presenting visual and auditory and audio-visual stimuli and were transformed to quantitative data by Neuro-guide Software. Results: Results of two-way repeated measures ANOVA in a 3 (condition) × 3(brain area) design revealed that main effect of the brain area was significant, results of Bonferroni post hoc test for brain area main effect showed that the mu rhythm was significantly more suppressed in Cz compared to C3 brain area (P=0.014). In addition, the results also showed that the mu rhythm in CZ was significantly more suppressed than C3 in both visual (P=0.025) and audio-visual (P=0.014) stimuli conditions, however, there were no significant differences between the mu rhythm Suppression in auditory condition among three brain areas. Conclusion: Finally, results confirmed that the integrity of the audio-visual stimuli causes further in mu rhythm suppression and mirror neurons activation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Mirror Neurons"
  • "Mu Rhythm Suppression"
  • "Audio-Visual Modeling"
  • "Basketball Lay-Up Shot"
مراجع
Alais D, & Burr D. (2004). The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Current biology, 14(3), 257-262.
Bangert M & Altenmüller EO. (2003). Mapping perception to action in piano practice: a longitudinal DC-EEG study. BMC neuroscience, 4(1), 26.
Barraclough N E, Xiao D, Baker CI, Oram MW, & Perrett DI. (2005). Integration of visual and auditory information by superior temporal sulcus neurons responsive to the sight of actions. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 17(3), 377-391.
Bengtsson SL, Ullén F, Ehrsson HH, Hashimoto T, Kito T, Naito E, . . . Sadato N. (2009). Listening to rhythms activates motor and premotor cortices. cortex, 45(1), 62-71.
Bowman LC, Bakermans-Kranenburg M J, Yoo K H, Canno, EN, Vanderwert RE, Ferrari P F, et al. (2017). The mu-rhythm can mirror: insights from experimental design, and looking past the controversy. Cortex, 96, 121–125.
Chen JL, Penhune VB, & Zatorre RJ. (2008). Listening to musical rhythms recruits motor regions of the brain. Cerebral cortex, 18(12), 2844-2854.
Cheng Y, Lee PL, Yang CY, Lin CP., Hung D, & Decety J. (2008). Gender differences in the mu rhythm of the human mirror-neuron system. PLoS One, 3(5), e2113.
Collier GL, & Logan G. (2000). Modality differences in short-term memory for rhythms. Memory & Cognition, 28(4), 529-538.
D'Ausilio A. (2007). The role of the mirror system in mapping complex sounds into actions. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27(22):5847–5848.
Doyle MC, & Snowden RJ. (2001). Identification of visual stimuli is improved by accompanying auditory stimuli: The role of eye movements and sound location. Perception, 30(7), 795-810.
Driver J. (1996). Enhancement of selective listening by illusory mislocation of speech sounds due to lip-reading. Nature, 381(6577), 66.
Effenberg A. (2001) Multimodal convergent information enhances perception accuracy of human movement patterns. Paper presented at the in Proc. 6th Ann. Congress of the ECSS, Sport und Buch, Strauss.
Effenberg A, Fehse U, & Weber A. (2011). Movement Sonification: Audiovisual benefits on motor learning. Paper presented at the BIO web of conferences.
Effenberg A, & Mechling H. (2003). Multimodal convergent information enhances reproduction accuracy of sport movements. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 8th Annual Congress of the European College of Sport Science. Salzburg, Austria.
Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Pavesi G, & Rizzolatti G. (1995). Motor facilitation during action observation: a magnetic stimulation study. Journal of neurophysiology, 73(6), 2608-2611.
Forster B, Cavina-Pratesi C, Aglioti SM, & Berlucchi G. (2002). Redundant target effect and intersensory facilitation from visual-tactile interactions in simple reaction time. Experimental Brain Research, 143(4), 480-487.
Francuz P, &  Zapała D. (2011). The suppression of the μ rhythm during the creation of imagery representation of movement. Neuroscience letters, 495(1), 39-43.
Giard M H, & Peronnet F. (1999). Auditory-visual integration during multimodal object recognition in humans: a behavioral and electrophysiological study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 11(5), 473-490.
Glenberg AM, Mann S, Altman L, Forman T, & Procise S. (1989). Modality effects in the coding reproduction of rhythms. Memory & Cognition, 17(4), 373-383.
Graziano M. (2008). The intelligent movement machine: An ethological perspective on the primate motor system: Oxford University Press.
Hobson HM, & Bishop DV. (2016). Mu suppression–A good measure of the human mirror neuron system? cortex, 82, 290-310.
Jola, C., McAleer, P. M. A. P., Grosbras, M. H., Love, S. A., Morison, G., and Pollick, F. E. (2013). Uni-and multisensory brain areas are synchronised across spectators when watching unedited dance recordings.Iperception, 4, 265–284.
Kaplan JT, & Iacoboni M. (2007). Multimodal action representation in human left ventral premotor cortex. Cognitive Processing, 8(2), 103-113.
Keele SW, Pokorny RA, Corcos DM, & Ivry R. (1985). Do perception and motor production share common timing mechanisms: A correlational analysis. Acta psychologica, 60(2), 173-191.
Keysers C, Kohler E, Umiltà MA, NanettiL, Fogassi L, & Gallese V. (2003). Audiovisual mirror neurons and action recognition. Experimental Brain Research, 153(4), 628-636.
Kohler E, Keysers C, Umilta MA, Fogassi L, Gallese V, & Rizzolatti G. (2002). Hearing sounds, understanding actions: action representation in mirror neurons. Science, 297(5582), 846-848.
Lahav A, Saltzman E, & Schlaug G. (2007). Action representation of sound: audiomotor recognition network while listening to newly acquired actions. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(2), 308-314.
Lepage J F, & Théoret H. (2006). EEG evidence for the presence of an action observation–execution matching system in children. European journal of neuroscience, 23(9), 2505-2510.
Maeda F, Kleiner-Fisman G, & Pascual-Leone A. (2002). Motor Facilitation While Observing Hand Actions: Specificity of the Effect and Role of Observer9s Orientation. Journal of neurophysiology, 87(3), 1329-1335.
McGarry LM, Russo FA, Schalles MD, & Pineda JA. (2012). Audio-visual facilitation of the mu rhythm. Experimental Brain Research, 218(4), 527-538.
Meredith MA, & Stein BE. (1986). Visual, auditory, and somatosensory convergence on cells in superior colliculus results in multisensory integration. Journal of neurophysiology, 56(3), 640-662.
Pineda JA. (2005). The functional significance of mu rhythms: Translating “seeing” and “hearing” into “doing”. Brain Research Reviews, 50(1), 57-68.
Pineda JA. (2008). Sensorimotor cortex as a critical component of an'extended'mirror neuron system: Does it solve the development, correspondence, and control problems in mirroring? Behavioral and Brain Functions, 4(1), 47.
Pizzamiglio L, Aprile T, Spitoni G, Pitzalis S, Bates E, D'amico S, & Di Russo F. (2005). Separate neural systems for processing action-or non-action-related sounds. Neuroimage, 24(3), 852-861.
Rizzolatti G, & Craighero L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 27, 169-192.
Rizzolatti G, Fadiga L, Gallese V, & Fogassi L. (1996). Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive brain research, 3(2), 131-141.
Rizzolatti G, Fogassi L, & Gallese V. (2001). Opinion: Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2(9), 661.
Scheef L, Boecker H, Daamen M, Fehse U, Landsberg MW, Granath D.-O, Effenberg AO. (2009). Multimodal motion processing in area V5/MT: evidence from an artificial class of audio-visual events. Brain research, 1252, 94-104.
Schmitz G , Mohammadi B, Hammer A, Heldmann M, Samii A, Münte TF, & Effenberg AO. (2013). Observation of sonified movements engages a basal ganglia frontocortical network. BMC neuroscience, 14(1), 32.
Secoli, R, Milot M.-H, Rosati G, & Reinkensmeyer DJ. (2011). Effect of visual distraction and auditory feedback on patient effort during robot-assisted movement training after stroke. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 8(1), 21.
Seitz AR, & Dinse HR. (2007). A common framework for perceptual learning. Current opinion in neurobiology, 17(2), 148-153.
Shams L, & Seitz AR. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in cognitive sciences, 12(11), 411-417.
Sors F, Murgia M, Santoro I, & Agostini T. (2015). Audiobased interventions in sport. Open Psychol. J, 8(3), 212-219.
Tanaka S (2021) Mirror Neuron Activity During Audiovisual Appreciation of Opera Performance. Frontiers in Psychology. 11:563031.
van Elk M, van Schie HT, Hunnius S, Vesper C, & Bekkering H. (2008). You'll never crawl alone: neurophysiological evidence for experience-dependent motor resonance in infancy. Neuroimage, 43(4), 808-814.
Vinken PM, Kröger D, Fehse U, Schmitz G, Brock H, & Effenberg AO. (2013). Auditory coding of human movement kinematics. Multisensory research, 26(6), 533-552.
Welch RB, DutionHurt LD, & Warren DH. (1986). Contributions of audition and vision to temporal rate perception. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 39(4), 294-300.
Woods EA, Hernandez AE, Wagner VE, & Beilock SL. (2014). Expert athletes activate somatosensory and motor planning regions of the brain when passively listening to familiar sports sounds. Brain and cognition, 87, 122-133.
Wu C C, Hamm JP, Lim V.K, and Kirk IJ. (2016). Mu rhythm suppression demonstrates action representation in pianists during passive listening of piano melodies. Experimental Brain Research, 234, 2133–2139.
عصب روان شناسی
دوره 9، شماره 32 - شماره پیاپی 32
اردیبهشت 1402
صفحه 27-39
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار