The complex interplay between perception, cognition, and action: a commentary on Bach et al. 2022

TL;DR

This paper discusses the relationship between perception, cognition, and action, challenging the idea that motor imagery is purely non-motoric.

Contribution

The paper introduces a critical analysis of motor imagery, questioning its non-motoric nature and proposing functional separability of effect and motor processes.

Findings

Motor imagery may involve motor processes, contradicting the claim of being non-motoric.

The functional separability of action effects and motor processes remains an open question.

The paper questions the terminology best suited to describe motor imagery's function.

Abstract

Bach (Psychological Research 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01773-w) offer a re-conceptualisation of motor imagery, influenced by older ideas of ideomotor action and formulated in terms of action effects rather than motor output. We share the view of an essential role of action effect in action planning and motor imagery processes, but we challenge the claim that motor imagery is non-motoric in nature. In the present article, we critically review some of Bach et al.’s proposed ideas and pose questions of whether effect and motor processes are functionally separable, and if not, what mechanisms underlie motor imagery and what terminology best captures its function.