Abstract
Introduction. Mental rehearsal of motor skill performance improves its coordination and effectiveness. However, mental image has been considered to be a hypothetical basis for voluntary movements even before its practical use begins. The present paper provides an original view on the current motor imagery understanding as a resolution of conflicts inherent to earlier concepts. The compatibility between historical and modern motor
imagery theories is discussed. Thereby, revision of some of existing recommendations concerning mental imagery use in sports is underpinned. Theoretical Basis. Ideomotor theory was the first concept considering mental imagery
as a basis for voluntary movements. T. Laycock and W. B. Carpenter described motor consequences of uncontrolled expression of a dominant idea. In the context of H. Herbart’s, R. H. Lotze’s, and E. Harless’ work, this phenomenon can be viewed more broadly in the light of systemic role of mental imagery in controlling movements. A number of instrumental studies of involuntary motor activity during movement imagination provided experimental confirmation of such phenomena and supported scientific interest in the ideomotor theory when it was criticized by the behaviorism. In the modern period, to resolve existing contradictions, M. Jeannerod has suggested considering the motor
image as a conscious representation of neurophysiological processes underlying the corresponding movement, which is formed in the absence of inactivating afferent response of effector organs. Results and Discussion. The modern understanding of the motor imagery focuses on its equivalence to the actual movement in terms of the underlying central neurophysiologica processes and their functions, including formation of skills with the repetition of
a corresponding movement. Following P. F. Lesgaft’s idea, an individual’s cognitive analysis of movements and understanding of its logical structure by means of mental imagery play an important role in motor learning, especially in its initial stages. Herewith, research shows that cognitive and motor processes are closely intertwined.
References
Laycock T. A treatise on the nervous diseases of women; comprising an inquiry into the nature, causes, and treatment of spinal and hysterical disorders. London, Longmans, 1840. 402 p.
Laycock T. On the reflex functions of the brain. Reprinted from N. XXXVII of The British and Foreign Medical Review, Bartholomew Close, UK, Adlard, 1845, pp. 1–16.
Herbart J. F. Lehrbuch zur Psychologie. Königsberg und Liepzig: Bey August Wilhelm Unzer, 1816. 214 p.
Herbart J. F. Psychologie als Wissenschaft neu gegründet auf Erfahrung, Metaphysik und Mathematik. Analytischer Teil. Verf., 1825. 541 p.
Lotze R. H. Medizinische Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele. Leipzig, Germany, Weidmann’sche Buchhandlung, 1852.
Harless E. Der Apparat des Willens. In: I. H. Fichte, H. Ulrici, I. U. Wirth (eds.) Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, V. 38. Halle, Germany, Pfeffer, 1861, pp. 50–73.
Allers R., Scheminzky F. über Aktionsströme der Muskeln bei motorischen Vorstellungen und verwandten Vorgängen. Pflüger's Archiv für die gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Tiere, 1926, V. 212, Issue 1, pp. 169–182. DOI: 10.1007/BF01723129
Jacobson E. Electrical measurements of neuromuscular states during mental activities (Part I). Imagination of movement involving skeletal muscle. American Journal of Physiology, 1930, V. 91, Issue 2, pp. 567–608. DOI: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1930.91.2.567
Shaw W. A. The relation of muscular action potentials to imaginal weight lifting. Archives of Psychology, 1940, no. 247, pp. 5–50.
Suinn R. M. Psychology and sports performance: Principles and applications. In: R. M. Suinn (ed.) Psychology in sports: Methods and applications. Minneapolis, Burgess, 1980, pp. 26–36.
Wehner T., Vogt S., Stadler M. Task-specific EMG-characteristics during mental training. Psychological Research, 1984, V. 46, no. 4, pp. 389–401.
James W. Principles of psychology. London, Macmillan, 1890.
Thorndike E. L. Ideo-motor action. Psychological Review, 1913, V. 20 (2), pp. 91–106. DOI: 10.1037/h0072027
Bernstein N. A. O lovkosti i ee razvitii [Dexterity and its development]. Moscow, Fizkul'tura i sport Publ., 1991. 288 p.
Lesgaft P. F., Shakhverdov G. G. (ed.) Sobranie pedagogicheskikh sochinenii [Collection of pedagogical works: V. 2]. Moscow, Fizkul'tura i sport Publ., 1952. 383 p.
Woodworth R. S. The cause of a voluntary movement. In: J. H. Tufts (ed.) Studies in philosophy and psychology. Garman memorial volume. Boston, Houghton-Mifflin, 1906, pp. 351–392.
Woodworth R. S. Le movement. Science, 1904, V. 20, Issue 498, pp. 78–79. DOI: 10.1126/science.20.498.78
Bair J. H. Development of voluntary control. Psychological Review, 1901, 8 (5), pp. 474–510. DOI: 10.1037/h0074157
Jeannerod M. The representing brain: Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1994, V. 17, Issue 2, pp. 187–202. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X00034026
Schilder P. The image and appearance of the human body. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935. 353 p.
Jeannerod M., Michel F., Prablanc C. The control of hand movements in a case of hemianaesthesia following a parietal lesion. Brain, 1984, V. 107, no. 3, pp. 899–920.
Decety J., Boisson D. Effect of brain and spinal cord injuries on motor imagery. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 1990, V. 240, Issue 1, pp. 39–43.
Kaminskii I. V., Veraksa A. N. Conventional theories and modern views on the nature of mental imaging of movements used in sport. Natsional'nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal – National Psychological Journal, 2017, no. 2 (26), pp. 16–25 (in Russian).
Sackett R. S. The influence of symbolic rehearsal upon the retention of a maze habit. The Journal of General Psychology, 1934, V. 10, Issue 2, pp. 376–398. DOI: 10.1080/00221309.1934.9917742
Arnold M. B. On the mechanism of suggestion and hypnosis. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1946, 41 (2), pp. 107–128.
Slade J. M., Landers D. M., Martin P. E. Muscular activity during real and imagined movements: A test of inflow explanations. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2002, V. 24, Issue 2, pp. 151–167.
Ryan E. D., Simons J. Cognitive demand, imagery, and frequency of mental rehearsal as factors influencing acquisition of motor skills. Journal of Sport Psychology, 1981, V. 3, Issue 1, pp. 35–45. DOI: 10.1123/jsp.3.1.35
Olsson C. J., Nyberg L. Brain simulation of action may be grounded in physical experience. Neurocase, 2011, V. 17, Issue 6, pp. 501–505. DOI: 10.1080/13554794.2010.547504
Holmes P. S., Collins D. J. The PETTLEP approach to motor imagery: A functional equivalence model for sport psychologists. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2001, V. 13, Issue 1, pp. 60–83. DOI: 10.1080/10413200109339004