Translating working memory into action: Behavioral and neural evidence for using motor representations in encoding visuo‐spatial sequences. Issue 7 (13th November 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Langner, Robert; Sternkopf, Melanie A.; Kellermann, Tanja S.; Grefkes, Christian; Kurth, Florian; Schneider, Frank; Zilles, Karl; Eickhoff, Simon B.
• Is Part Of: Human brain mapping. Volume 35:Issue 7(2014:Jul.)
• Page Start: 3465
• Page End: 3484
• Publication Date: 2013-11-13
• Subjects: Brain mapping -- Periodicals; 611.81
• DOI: 10.1002/hbm.22415
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1065-9471

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>The neurobiological organization of action‐oriented working memory is not well understood. To elucidate the neural correlates of translating visuo‐spatial stimulus sequences into delayed (memory‐guided) sequential actions, we measured brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging while participants encoded sequences of four to seven dots appearing on fingers of a left or right schematic hand. After variable delays, sequences were to be reproduced with the corresponding fingers. Recall became less accurate with longer sequences and was initiated faster after long delays. Across both hands, encoding and recall activated bilateral prefrontal, premotor, superior and inferior parietal regions as well as the basal ganglia, whereas hand‐specific activity was found (albeit to a lesser degree during encoding) in contralateral premotor, sensorimotor, and superior parietal cortex. Activation differences after long versus short delays were restricted to motor‐related regions, indicating that rehearsal during long delays might have facilitated the conversion of the memorandum into concrete motor programs at recall. Furthermore, basal ganglia activity during encoding selectively predicted correct recall. Taken together, the results suggest that to‐be‐reproduced visuo‐spatial sequences are encoded as prospective action representations (motor intentions), possibly in addition to retrospective sensory codes. Overall, our study supports and extends multi‐component models of working memory, highlighting the notion that sensory input can be coded in multiple ways depending on what the memorandum is to be used for. <italic>Hum Brain Mapp 35:3465–3484, 2014</italic>. © <bold>2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc</bold>.</p> </abstract>