Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Hierarchy of Motor Control01:18

Hierarchy of Motor Control

The hierarchy of motor control refers to the different levels of organization and processing involved in controlling movement in the body. These levels range from higher cortical areas involved in planning and decision-making to lower spinal cord reflexes that respond automatically to external stimuli.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Functional brain organization is stable within individuals across years.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Emotional Attention Moderates the Link between Allostatic-interoceptive System Organization and Depression in Adolescents.

Affective science·2026
Same author

Efficient Deep Learning Models for Predicting Individualized Task Activation From Resting-State Functional Connectivity.

Human brain mapping·2026
Same author

Refining RDoC Using Individual-Level Task fMRI Factor Models Reveals Reproducible and Clinically Relevant Brain-Wide Motifs.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Building an open ecosystem for molecular neuroimaging: standards and tools from the OpenNeuroPET initiative.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

Quality assessment and control of unprocessed anatomical, functional and diffusion MRI of the human brain using MRIQC.

Nature protocols·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 3, 2026

The "Motor" in Implicit Motor Sequence Learning: A Foot-stepping Serial Reaction Time Task
10:39

The "Motor" in Implicit Motor Sequence Learning: A Foot-stepping Serial Reaction Time Task

Published on: May 3, 2018

Automaticity in motor sequence learning does not impair response inhibition.

Jessica R Cohen1, Russell A Poldrack

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095-1563, USA. jrcohen@psych.ucla.edu

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
|July 9, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study investigated automaticity and response inhibition, finding that increased automatic behavior does not impair the ability to stop a response. This suggests automatic actions are not always ballistic.

More Related Videos

Online Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol for Measuring Cortical Physiology Associated with Response Inhibition
08:55

Online Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol for Measuring Cortical Physiology Associated with Response Inhibition

Published on: February 8, 2018

Study Motor Skill Learning by Single-pellet Reaching Tasks in Mice
06:04

Study Motor Skill Learning by Single-pellet Reaching Tasks in Mice

Published on: March 4, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 3, 2026

The "Motor" in Implicit Motor Sequence Learning: A Foot-stepping Serial Reaction Time Task
10:39

The "Motor" in Implicit Motor Sequence Learning: A Foot-stepping Serial Reaction Time Task

Published on: May 3, 2018

Online Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol for Measuring Cortical Physiology Associated with Response Inhibition
08:55

Online Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol for Measuring Cortical Physiology Associated with Response Inhibition

Published on: February 8, 2018

Study Motor Skill Learning by Single-pellet Reaching Tasks in Mice
06:04

Study Motor Skill Learning by Single-pellet Reaching Tasks in Mice

Published on: March 4, 2014

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Motor Control

Background:

  • The concept of automaticity in behavior is often linked to the idea of ballistic actions, which are difficult to stop once initiated.
  • Understanding the relationship between automaticity and response inhibition is crucial for explaining the control of learned behaviors.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the relationship between automaticity and response inhibition.
  • To test the hypothesis that automatic behavior is ballistic and therefore less amenable to inhibition.

Main Methods:

  • Participants underwent extensive training on a serial reaction time (SRT) task with a learned sequence.
  • Automaticity was assessed via a dual-task paradigm (concurrent letter counting).
  • Response inhibition was measured using a stop-signal task.

Main Results:

  • Training on the SRT task led to increased automaticity, indicated by reduced dual-task costs.
  • Response inhibition, measured by the stop-signal reaction time, did not change with training.
  • This lack of change in inhibition occurred even in participants who demonstrated high automaticity without dual-task interference.

Conclusions:

  • The development of automaticity in motor tasks does not necessarily impair response inhibition.
  • These findings challenge the notion that all automatic behaviors are ballistic.
  • Automatic processes may allow for continued inhibitory control, suggesting a more nuanced understanding of behavioral automaticity.