Cited by 152Action Observation and SynchronizationTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesMotor Control and Adaptation

Making Mirrors: Premotor Cortex Stimulation Enhances Mirror and Counter-mirror Motor Facilitation

Open access
Catmur, Caroline, Mars, Rogier B., Rushworth, Matthew F., Heyes, Cecilia·2011·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Mirror neurons fire during both the performance of an action and the observation of the same action being performed by another. These neurons have been recorded in ventral premotor and inferior parietal cortex in the macaque, but human brain imaging studies suggest that areas responding to the observation and performance of actions are more widespread. We used paired-pulse TMS to test whether dorsal as well as ventral premotor cortex is involved in producing mirror motor facilitation effects. Stimulation of premotor cortex enhanced mirror motor facilitation and also enhanced the effects of counter-mirror training. No differences were found between the two premotor areas. These results support an associative account of mirror neuron properties, whereby multiple regions that process both sensory and motor information have the potential to contribute to mirror effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn.2010.21590

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • When transcranial magnetic stimulation is applied to M1 during passive action observation, the amplitude of motor evoked potentials recorded from muscles required to execute that action is greater than when observing a different action.

    “When TMS is applied to M1 during passive action observation, the amplitude of the MEPs recorded from the muscles required to execute that action is greater than the amplitude of the MEPs recorded when observing a different action.”

    From Mirror neurons: from origin to function (2014) · cites this paper as Catmur et al., 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Catmur, C., Mars, R. B., Rushworth, M. F., & Heyes, C.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2011-09-01
Volume
23
Issue
9
Pages
2352-2362
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2096625159
Cited by
152
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 21
FWCI
21.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Surrey
  • Medical Research Council
  • Economic and Social Research Council (RES-538-28-1001)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
mirror neurons, premotor cortex, dorsal premotor cortex, ventral premotor cortex, paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, action observation, motor facilitation
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Electromyography, Female, Humans, Imitative Behavior, Male, Motor Cortex, Movement, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult

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