Comparing self‐report and mental chronometry measures of motor imagery ability
Sarah Elizabeth Williams, Aymeric Guillot, Franck Di Rienzo, Jennifer Cumming
Abstract
Sarah Elizabeth Williams, Aymeric Guillot, Franck Di Rienzo, Jennifer Cumming
Abstract
The present study investigated the relationship between two of the most common measures of motor imagery ability, self-report ratings, and chronometric assessment. This was done for three types of imagery modalities: external visual imagery (EVI), internal visual imagery (IVI), and kinesthetic imagery (KI). Measures of imagery ability (i.e. self-report and mental chronometry) were also compared across skill levels. Participants (N = 198) completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) to generate self-report ratings. Chronometric assessment was obtained by recording the duration of each MIQ-3 movement imaged and physically performed and then calculating a discrepancy score. There were no significant correlations between self-report and mental chronometry for any of the three motor imagery types (p > .05). When assessing the different types of motor imagery ability using self-report ratings, elite athletes had significantly higher KI than IVI, which was in turn significantly higher than EVI (p < .05). When assessing motor imagery ability using mental chronometry, there were no significant differences in imagery type (p > .05). Findings suggest both measures address different components of MI quality and should be used together to obtain a more comprehensive assessment of motor imagery ability.
OpenAlex reports 110 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The present study investigated the relationship between two of the most common measures of motor imagery ability, self-report ratings, and chronometric assessment. This was done for three types of imagery modalities: external visual imagery (EVI), internal visual imagery (IVI), and kinesthetic imagery (KI). Measures of imagery ability (i.e. self-report and mental chronometry) were also compared across skill levels. Participants (N = 198) completed the Movement Imagery Questionnaire-3 (MIQ-3) to generate self-report ratings. Chronometric assessment was obtained by recording the duration of each MIQ-3 movement imaged and physically performed and then calculating a discrepancy score. There were no significant correlations between self-report and mental chronometry for any of the three motor imagery types (p > .05). When assessing the different types of motor imagery ability using self-report ratings, elite athletes had significantly higher KI than IVI, which was in turn significantly higher than EVI (p < .05). When assessing motor imagery ability using mental chronometry, there were no significant differences in imagery type (p > .05). Findings suggest both measures address different components of MI quality and should be used together to obtain a more comprehensive assessment of motor imagery ability.
Key concepts: Motor imagery, Mental chronometry, Mental image, Psychology, Physical medicine and rehabilitation, Cognitive psychology, Electroencephalography, Brain–computer interface