Andres, F. G., Mima, T., Schulman, A. E., Dichgans, J., Hallett, M., & Gerloff, C. (1999). Functional coupling of human cortical sensorimotor areas during bimanual skill acquisition. Brain, 122, 855-870. doi:10.1093/brain/122.5.855

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: The Effect of Different Movement Exercises on Cognitive and Motor Abilities

  AUTHORS: Monika Thomas

  KEYWORDS: Motor Learning; Sensorimotor Adaptation; Cognition; Brain Gym®

  JOURNAL NAME: Advances in Physical Education, Vol.2 No.4, November 28, 2012

  ABSTRACT: The influence of physical activity on motor and cognitive performance has been approved in several studies. However, it is still unclear which functions are affected, and why. It also remains unknown what type of physical training is best suitable. The present study focuses on special movement aspects based on the Brain Gym? program. Four groups of subjects (n = 64) participated in two experiments with pre-post intervention design. In experiment 1 two groups of subjects were exposed to a sensorimotor adaptation study design by executing center out pointing movements under distorted visual feedback conditions with their dominant and non-dominant arm to test for intermanual transfer (IMT) as pre- and posttest. The intervention in both groups consisted of specified movement exercises with the right and left extremities: participants of Experimental group executed movements crossing the body midline and participants of Control group movements without crossing the body midline. Results showed a decreased retention of adaptation but larger IMT for Experimental group during posttest. We conclude that movements crossing the body midline impede retention but enhance IMT of sensorimotor adaptation. A potential relationship to an improvement of communication between the cerebral hemispheres evoked by the movement exercises crossing the body midline is rather speculative. In experiment 2 two groups were exposed to the d2-test measuring concentration and attention and a dice-test testing for visual-spatial abilities as pre- and posttest. The interventions were similar to experiment 1. Results yielded no differences between groups such that different effects of both interventions could not have been shown.