Cited by 1,156Motor Control and AdaptationTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesTactile and Sensory Interactions

Rapid plasticity of human cortical movement representation induced by practice

Classen, Joseph, Liepert, Joachim, Wise, Steven P., Hallett, Mark, Cohen, Leonardo G.·1998·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

Classen, Joseph, Joachim Liepert, Steven P. Wise, Mark Hallett, and Leonardo G. Cohen. Rapid plasticity of human cortical movement representation induced by practice. J. Neurophysiol. 79: 1117–1123, 1998. The process of acquiring motor skills through the sustained performance of complex movements is associated with neural plasticity. However, it is unknown whether even simple movements, repeated over a short period of time, are effective in inducing cortical representational changes. Whether the motor cortex can retain specific kinematic aspects of a recently practiced movement is also unknown. We used focal transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex to evoke isolated and directionally consistent thumb movements. Thumb movements then were practiced in a different direction. Subsequently, TMS came to evoke movements in or near the recently practiced direction for several minutes before returning to the original direction. To initiate a change of the TMS-evoked movement direction, 15 or 30 min of continuous training were required in most of the subjects and, on two occasions, as little as 5 or 10 min. Substantially smaller effects followed more direct stimulation of corticofugal axons with transcranial electrical stimulation, pointing to cortex as the site of plasticity. These findings suggest that the training rapidly, and transiently, established a change in the cortical network representing the thumb, which encoded kinematic details of the practiced movement. This phenomenon may be regarded as a short-term memory for movement and be the first step of skill acquisition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1998.79.2.1117

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 1,156

Authors
Classen, J., Liepert, J., Wise, S. P., Hallett, M., & Cohen, L. G.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1998-02-01
Volume
79
Issue
2
Pages
1117-1123
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W1938199795
Cited by
1,156
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 53
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
motor learning, motor cortex plasticity, motor representations, thumb movement, transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial electrical stimulation, corticofugal axons, skill acquisition, movement direction
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Magnetics, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Motor Skills, Neuronal Plasticity, Thumb

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review