LAUSR

Abstract In this study, we compared the effectiveness of concurrent action observation and motor imagery (AO + MI), observing with the intent to imitate (active observation; AO), and passive observation (PO) training interventions for improving eye–hand coordination. Fifty participants were assigned to five groups [AO + MI, AO, PO, physical practice (PP); control] and performed a visuomotor rotation task, whilst eye movements were recorded. Each participant then performed 20 task trials in a training intervention before repeating the visuomotor rotation task in a post-test. As expected, PP produced the greatest improvement in task performance and eye–hand coordination. However, in comparison to the control group, AO + MI training produced a statistically significant increase in both task performance and eye–hand coordination, but no such improvements were found following AO or PO.