Strategies For Performing Etudes Chopin

INTEGRATING PIANO TECHNIQUE, PHYSIOLOGY, AND MOTOR LEARNING:
STRATEGIES FOR PERFORMING THE CHOPIN ETUDES
by
Tracy D. Lipke-Perry
_____________________
Copyright © Tracy D. Lipke-Perry 2008
A Document Submitted to the Faculty of the
SCHOOL OF MUSIC
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
2008
2
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

GRADUATE COLLEGE
As members of the Document Committee, we certify that we have read the document
prepared by Tracy D. Lipke-Perry entitled, “Integrating Piano Technique, Physiology,
and Motor Learning: Strategies for Performing the Chopin Etudes,” and recommend that
it be accepted as fulfilling the document requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Musical
Arts.
_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

Paula Fan
_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

Tannis Gibson
_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

Lisa Zdechlik
Final approval and acceptance of this document is contingent upon the candidate’s
submission of the final copies of the document to the Graduate College.
I hereby certify that I have read this document prepared under my direction and
recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the document requirement.
________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

Document Director: Paula Fan
3
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This document has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an

advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library
to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this document are allowable without special permission, provided
that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended
quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by
the copyright holder.
SIGNED: Tracy D. Lipke-Perry

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................9
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 1: HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY PIANO
ETUDE: TECHNICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL DEVELOPMENTS......................... 13
Exercises, Etudes, and Concert Studies...................................................................... 13
The Rise of the Nineteenth-Century Piano Etude ....................................................... 14
The Chopin Etudes .................................................................................................... 15
Piano Technique and Philosophical Changes: The Nineteenth and Twentieth
Centuries ................................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER 2: CHOPIN’S TEACHING PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY....... 21
General Principles: Technique Building.................................................................... 21
Scales and arpeggios.............................................................................................. 21
Exercises ............................................................................................................... 22
Chopin and Psychological Processes Involved in Playing the Piano........................... 23
CHAPTER 3: THE NEUROMUSCULAR SYSTEM, HAND PHYSIOLOGY, AND
PIANO PRACTICE AND PERFORMANCE: AN OVERVIEW OF SELECT
ISSUES......................................................................................................................... 25
The Nature-Nurture Debate ....................................................................................... 25
Skill Training and the Central Nervous System.......................................................... 28
Neural Plasticity .................................................................................................... 29
Motor Cortex ..................................................................................................... 31

5
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
Spinal Mechanisms ............................................................................................ 34
Motor Units ....................................................................................................... 35
α-Motoneurons .............................................................................................. 37
Hand Physiology ....................................................................................................... 39
Skeletal Muscles and Motor Units.......................................................................... 39
Structural Differences Within Individual Muscle Fibers..................................... 40
Physiology of Movement Control .............................................................................. 41
Speed..................................................................................................................... 41
Exercise Training and Maximal Velocity (Vmax)................................................. 41
Force ..................................................................................................................... 42
Gradation of Force............................................................................................. 43
Force and Efficiency.......................................................................................... 44
Two-joint and multi-joint muscles.................................................................. 44
Bilateral deficit .............................................................................................. 44
The Fingers and Thumb............................................................................................. 45
Finger Independence.............................................................................................. 45
The Thumb ............................................................................................................ 47
Pianists and Hand Physiology.................................................................................... 49
CHAPTER 4: SKILL ACQUISITON: SENSORIMOTOR LEARNING ..................... 51
Feedback ................................................................................................................... 51
Stages of Learning, Specificity of Practice, and Feedback...................................... 52

6
Auditory Feedback ................................................................................................ 53
Visual Feedback .................................................................................................... 55
Multi-Sensory Integration.......................................................................................... 56
Audio-Motor Coupling .......................................................................................... 57
Mirror Neurons...................................................................................................... 61
Music and Mental Rehearsal...................................................................................... 67
Motor Imagery....................................................................................................... 68
Visual Imagery ...................................................................................................... 70
Musical Imagery.................................................................................................... 71
Imagery, Performance, and Brain Activity................................................................. 76
Attention ................................................................................................................... 77
Motor Learning and the Human Hand........................................................................ 82
Handedness and Facility of the Non-Dominant Hand............................................. 82
Bi-manual Coordination......................................................................................... 84
Modes of Interlimb Coordination ....................................................................... 85
Finger Tapping and Polyrhythms ....................................................................... 88
Bi-manual Transfer ............................................................................................ 90
Musical Skills and Acquisition of New Coordination Patterns............................ 94
CHAPTER 5: THE CHOPIN ETUDES AND SKILL ACQUISITION......................... 98
Force Gradation: Chopin Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 3, 6, and 11; Op. 25, No. 3; and
KK II b/3 Nr. 2 .......................................................................................................... 98

7
Etude Op. 10, No. 3 ............................................................................................. 102
Finger Independence: Chopin Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 2, 4, 8 and 12 ........................... 104
Etude Op. 10, No. 8 ............................................................................................. 106
Left Hand Facility: Chopin Etude Op. 10, No. 12 .................................................... 108
Etude Op. 10, No. 12, mm. 1-2 ............................................................................ 109
Etude Op. 10, No. 12, m. 9................................................................................... 110
The Thumb: Chopin Etude Op. 10, No. 5................................................................. 112
Speed: Chopin Etudes Op. 10, No. 4 and Op. 25, and 12 ......................................... 115
Etude Op. 10, No. 4 ............................................................................................. 115
Etude Op. 25, No. 12 ........................................................................................... 115
Flexibility and Suppleness via Imagery: Etude Op. 25, No. 1................................... 120
Polyrhythms: Drei Etüden: KK II b/3, No. 1........................................................... 123
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................. 126
Strategies for Learning and Teaching....................................................................... 126
Practice and Performance..................................................................................... 126
Aural feedback and aural representations ......................................................... 131
Observational learning ..................................................................................... 132
Scales, piano literature, and the brain ............................................................... 132
Discussion ............................................................................................................... 135
APPENDIX A: HENLE URTEXT EDITION PERMISSION...................................... 137

8
APPENDIX B: WIENER URTEXT EDITION PERMISSION.................................... 138
REFERENCES............................................................................................................ 139
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 3, mm. 1-4........................................................... 98
Figure 3. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 11, mm. 1-3......................................................... 99
Figure 5. Chopin Nouvelles Etudes KK II b/3, No. 2, mm. 1-4...................................... 99
Figure 10. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 8, mm. 8-13 ..................................................... 106
Figure 11. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 8, mm. 26-29 ................................................... 106
Figure 13. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 12, mm. 10-12 ................................................. 107
Figure 18. Chopin Etude, Op. 10, No. 5, mm. 1-7....................................................... 113
10
LIST OF FIGURES - Continued
Figure 23. Chopin Nouvelles Etudes KK II b/3, No. 1, mm. 1-11................................ 123
11
ABSTRACT
Chopin’s twenty-seven études are both unique and standard within the genre of
advanced piano literature. Having been composed as the instrument itself was
standardized and on the heels of the didactic studies of the classical period, Chopin’s
études are widely heralded as exemplary pedagogical material for their uniform quality
and comprehensiveness. Nevertheless, despite the vast number of resources devoted to
the topic of how one might approach the études and the innumerable endorsements which
tout their incomparable worth, relatively cursory mention is made of their musical value.
From a physiological perspective, what makes Chopin’s études exceptional amongst vast
pedagogical repertory, and how does their musical value impact what pianists learn from
their study?
From a modern perspective, a musical image is both the model and the yardstick
for the measure of technical achievement as one compares performance with his or her
musical image. The Chopin études are therefore unique in two ways. First, a pianist’s
musical image of each of the Chopin études initiates an individual process of motor
learning. The musical images, and therefore the goals and the processes, are inherently
different from the vast majority of purely didactic studies and exercises. Secondly, the
genius of Chopin permeates the overall conception of the études as he intuitively
employed the human ability to develop motor skills in natural ways which continue to be
understood and supported by ongoing research.
This paper explores the Chopin études from a largely physiological and
psychological perspective such that modern studies of mental imagery, skill acquisition,
12
and human motor abilities converge and highlight what is readily available in the music
itself.
13
CHAPTER 1
HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY PIANO ETUDE:
TECHNICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL DEVELOPMENTS
Exercises, Etudes, and Concert Studies
Exercises, études, and concert studies are intended to strengthen a particular
aspect of piano technique. Each type of piece uniquely reflects the changes occurring
throughout the course of music history with regard to stylistic characteristics and taste,
the development and evolution of instruments themselves, and the period of time during
which the piece is composed. In his discussion of the Chopin études entitled, “The
Twenty-Seven Etudes and Their Antecedents,” Finlow notes the following distinctions
within the genre of didactic keyboard music:
(i) exercises, in which a didactic objective--the isolation and repetition of a specific

technical formula--is assigned primary attention, any musical or characteristic interest
being incidental; (ii) etudes, wherein musical and didactic functions properly stand in a
complementary and indivisible association; and (iii) concert studies, in which the
didactic element is mostly incidental to the primary characteristic substance (though
the music will invariably involve some particular exploitation and demonstration of
virtuoso technique).”1
Because individual études typically focus on one aspect of technique, they often
evolve from a single musical germ. As a result, the degree to which musical qualities are
woven into the fabric of the étude is dependent upon the individuality of the composer.
1
Simon Finlow, “The Twenty-Seven Etudes and Their Antecedents,” in The
Cambridge Companion to Chopin, ed. Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1992), 53.
14
The Rise of the Nineteenth-Century Piano Etude
The growing popularity of the piano and the rise of the middle class in the
nineteenth century spurred the demand for piano pedagogues and teaching material
related to the capabilities of the instrument and the demands of contemporary repertoire.
Among the virtuoso studies written in the nineteenth century were those by Felix
Mendelssohn (1809-1847), Robert Schumann (1810-1856), Frédéric Chopin (1810-
1849), Franz Liszt (1811-1886), Charles-Valentin Alkan (1813-1888), Adolph von
Henselt (1814-1889), Johannes Brahms (1833-1897), and Camille Saint-Saëns (1835-
1921). Only a select few remain a significant part of modern concert repertory, however.
Schumann, Chopin, and Liszt are the three musicians who by their work saved piano
composition from the shallowness into which it was in danger of falling or had already
fallen. . . . In all of these, this impulse [toward seriousness of thought] was lively and
effective, although in Chopin it had less of a controversial tinge than it did in
Schumann, and less of an exhibitionistic attitude than it did in the virtuoso Liszt.2
Schumann, Chopin, and Liszt were all fine pianists, and each extended the scope of the
piano étude by incorporating musical challenges into their studies which were technically
more demanding as well. In some ways, their études represented the culmination of a
particular type of étude and more closely exemplified the spirit of the original meaning of
the word. As Ganz noted in his survey of the history of the piano étude, “in French the
term étude has been in use since the twelfth century; initially it denoted, as did the
2
Alfred Einstein, Music in the Romantic Era (New York: W. W. Norton & Co.,
Inc., 1947), 202.
15
original Latin studium, application or taste, the latter word referring to its critical and
artistic sense of implication.”3
The Chopin Etudes
Writing in 1900, Donald Tovey declared, “Chopin’s Etudes stand alone.”4
Indeed, by many accounts, Chopin’s twenty-seven études are both unique and standard
within the genre of advanced piano literature. Composed as the instrument itself was
standardized and on the heels of the didactic studies of the classical period, they have
become part of standard teaching literature and performance repertoire. As noted by the
eminent pianist and scholar, Paul Badura-Skoda, “ . . . these are the Etudes on which the
world’s elite pianists have cut their teeth, so to speak, ever since they were composed a
century and a quarter ago.”5
The significance of Chopin’s contribution to the genre was recognized early on by
both Franz Liszt and Robert Schumann. In his article, “Some Piano Studies Arranged
According to Their Technical Aims,” published in the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik in 1836,
Robert Schumann named Chopin as one of five composers ‘who are clearly the most
important’ writers of études, the others being J. S. Bach, Clementi, Cramer, and
Oscar Bloch, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue française (Paris: Les Presses

3
universitaires de France, 1932), I, 277; quoted in Peter Felix Ganz, “The Development of
the Etude for Pianoforte,” (Ph. D. diss., Northwestern University, 1960), 8-9.
Donald Tovey, “Observations on Chopin’s Etudes,” in Essays in Musical

4
Analysis: Chamber Music (London, 1944), 155-6.
Paul Badura-Skoda, preface to Etudes Op. 10, by Frédéric Chopin (Vienna:

5
Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), vi.

16
Moscheles.6 In the second half of his article which categorized études according to their
technical features, Schumann indicated with an asterisk those études which, in addition to
their technical worth, were judged to be poetic as well. Schumann highlighted eleven of
the twelve Op. 10 Chopin études with asterisks leaving out only Op. 10, No. 2.7
Despite the vast number of resources devoted to the topic of how one might
approach the Chopin études and the innumerable endorsements which tout their technical
worth, the technical and musical value of the études often seem to be considered
independent of one another. For example, Finlow states that the Chopin études are
“matchless in their capacity to train the fingers, while their musical quality clearly
permits – or rather demands – public performance.”8 What has yet to have been
considered are the ways in which musical and technical qualities are intertwined mentally
and physically and the impact that such an arrangement might have on the development
of piano technique.
Piano Technique and Philosophical Changes:
The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
One of the striking aspects of discussion regarding piano technique in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries is the emphasis on not simply the fingers, but the
relationship between the mind and physical execution in technical development and piano
6
Finlow, “The Twenty-Seven Etudes,” 51-2.
7
Robert Schumann, “Die Pianoforte-Etuden, ihren Zwecken nach geordnet,” Neue
Zeitschrift für Musik 4 (1836): 45-6.
8
Idem, 50.
17
performance. Tobias Matthay is widely remembered for his philosophy regarding the
“invisible” aspects of playing the piano and for developing the principle of rotation, but
he was also a proponent of the use of imagery. In The Visible and Invisible in Pianoforte
Technique Being a Digest of the Author’s Technical Teachings up to Date, he stated that
“technique means the power of expressing oneself musically. . . . Technique is rather a
matter of the Mind than of the ‘fingers.’ . . . To Acquire Technique therefore implies that
you must induce and enforce a particular mental-muscular association and co-operation
for every possible musical effect.”9
Matthay’s view is corroborated by many. English pianist and music educator,
Sidney Harrison, noted that “we cannot make a sharp division between technique and
interpretation. As the technique gains in command and confidence, it actually seems to
prompt the imagination to bolder and bolder flights.”10 Describing Artur Schnabel’s
approach to technique, one of his students wrote that “it was his constantly expressed
belief that if you knew exactly what you wanted, you would find—invent if necessary—
the means to achieve it.”11 Leon Fleisher concurs suggesting that, “it’s your musical
ideas that form or decide for you what kind of technique you are going to use. In other
9
Tobias Matthay, The Visible and Invisible in Pianoforte Technique Being a
Digest of the Author’s Technical Teachings up to Date (London: Oxford University
Press, 1932), 3.
Sidney Harrison, Piano Technique (London: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, Ltd.,
10
1953), 57.
David Goldberger, “Artur Schnabel’s Master Classes,” The Piano Teacher 5(4)
11
(1963): 6.
18
words, if you are trying to get a certain sound, you just experiment around to find the
movement that will get this sound.”12
Another prominent figure and one of the significant pedagogues in the first half of
the twentieth century was Abby Whiteside. Many of her views are described in The
Indispensables of Piano Playing published in 1955 and Mastering the Chopin Etudes and
Other Essays published posthumously in 1969.13 Most significantly for the topic at hand,
the principles and methodology that were the foundation of her teaching can now be
understood and substantiated with the most recent scientific advances of the twenty-first
century.
While advocating a holistic approach to piano technique, Whiteside suggested that
the impetus for pianistic development and performance lies in imagery and the power of
the mind. “It is only when the emotional response to the aural image of the music creates
in the performer’s body a physical response, a basic rhythm, as a counterpart to the
rhythmic flow in a composition, that he is enabled to realize to the fullest extent the
beauty inherent in the music.”14 Likewise, Whiteside encouraged mental rehearsal and
imagery as part of a pianist’s daily routine and wrote the following. “Just never take it
for granted that the fingers have given up. Instead, set up a ‘daily dozen’ of thinking
12
Leon Fleisher, “About Practicing and Making Music,” Clavier 2(4) (1963): 12.
See A. Whiteside, Indispensables of Piano Playing (New York: Coleman-Ross

13
Co., 1955) and Ibid., Mastering the Chopin Etudes, ed. Joseph Prostakoff and Sophia
Rosoff (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969).
Joseph Prostakoff and Sophia Rosoff, foreword to Mastering the Chopin Etudes
14
and Other Essays, by Abby Whiteside (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969), 4.
19
patterns before the hands are allowed on the keyboard.”15 Whiteside further noted the
importance of imagery and emotional involvement in practice, not just performance.
Two of her students, Joseph Prostakoff and Sophia Rosoff, recalled the following:
She constantly stressed the necessity of being emotionally involved in practicing a

performance. Early in her career she learned that the human body is so constituted that
the physical coordination used when one is emotionally involved in a performance is
different from the one operating when one is not. This, incidentally, is the reason why
the knowledge of which bones are moved by which muscles is, by itself, of
comparatively little value to the pianist or teacher. Because she was searching for the
basis of a beautiful performance, it was clear to her that an automatic, uninvolved
performance—unfortunately, a commonplace state for the musician practicing
exercises--is not merely negative, it is an actively harmful experience. An essential
element of a superlative performance is systematically ignored, avoided. The ultimate
result of automatic, uninspired practicing can only be an automatic, uninspired
performance.16
It would come as no surprise therefore, that Whiteside was not a particular
proponent of scales or Hanon and Czerny exercises. Regarding the latter, Whiteside
wrote the following.
Czerny has been responsible for untold boredom, and that is exactly why his exercises
should be discarded. Creativeness in ideas is fostered by response to beauty, not to
boredom. It is time we learned to use beautiful music for achieving results if we are
interested in producing beautiful playing. Hanon is used for developing independent
fingers with equal hitting power. Obviously this cannot be accomplished. Each finger
may gain more power, but there will still be inequality in the fingers. Fingers need to
be expert only in transmitting the power of the arm. That is a different and far simpler
problem, which does not demand mechanical and uninteresting patterns.17
Whiteside, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 38.

15
Prostakoff and Rosoff, foreword, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 20.

16
Whiteside, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 177-8.

17
20
Not only did Whiteside espouse the virtues of imagery in performance, but imagery
was central to her approach to teaching as well.
Even then she believed that imagery was much more important in transferring the
desired coordination to the student than a prosaic listing of the various factors of this
coordination. Above all, she was always a teacher and was as much concerned with
the means for communicating an analysis to a pupil as with the analysis itself. For
example, in the early Thirties she had read and very much approved of Otto Ortmann’s
book, The Physiological Mechanics of Piano Technique.18 Commenting many years
later, almost at the end of her career, she said, ‘I am still convinced that his analysis of
what happens when one plays well is accurate. My question is, how would he teach
it?’”19
In addition to her insistence on the importance of imagery, another of Whiteside’s
significant tenets as a pianist and pedagogue was her unwavering belief in the value of
the Chopin études.
Each Etude brings into relief a special balance in activity. One can say, ‘here are the
ingredients. For this or that Etude add a bit more of this or that action.’ In these
Etudes there is a completely fascinating handling of the various problems of a skilled
coordination. There is no other set of Etudes which so comprehensively presents
every necessary aspect of virtuosity, always combined with musical beauty.20
Whiteside’s insight into the mental components of pianistic development and
performance and her views regarding the Chopin études combined with recent
developments in physiology and motor learning set the stage for enhancing our
understanding of how pianists approach practice, performance, and pedagogy.
O. Ortmann, The Physiological Mechanics of Piano Technique (New York: E.P.

18
Dutton & Co., 1929).
Prostakoff and Rosoff, foreword, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 8.

19

20
21
CHAPTER 2
CHOPIN’S TEACHING PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLGY
Chopin was an influential pedagogue despite contributing very few words on the
subject of pedagogy. Of particular interest are the annotated scores of his pupils,
exercises he wrote for his niece, sketches of a method book, his compositions, and the
reminiscences of several of his students.
General Principles: Technique Building
Scales and Arpeggios
For Chopin, “The development of technical skill was not an end in itself, but
merely a means of freeing the hands for musical expression.”21 “He [Chopin]
recommended daily work on scales and arpeggios played with regularity [presumably of
rhythm], and set great store by scales lightly accented in groups of three or four, or even
played three against four and vice versa.”22
Now Chopin, from the very first lesson, insisted upon the hand’s retention of its
position [fingers fall freely and lightly; hand held as though suspended in the air]; . . .
the hand still retaining its horizontal position; the hand was thus prepared for the more
difficult scales, and for arpeggio passages, in which the wide intervals were eventually
reached without effort and without greatly raising the fingers.23
Jeanne Holland, “Chopin the Teacher,” Journal of the American Liszt Society 17
21
(1985): 42.
Maria von Grewingk, Eine Tochter Alt-Rigas, Schülerin Chopins (Riga: Löffler,
22
1928), 20.
Jean Kleczynski, How to Play Chopin. The Works of Frederic Chopin, Their
23
Proper Interpretation, trans. Alfred Whittingham (London: William Reeves, 1913), 29-
32.
22
Due to the ease of placing longer fingers on the black keys, Chopin approached scales
beginning with B, F-sharp, and D-flat whereas C major was taught last.24 “It is useless to
start learning scales on the piano with C major, the easiest to read, and the most difficult
for the hand, as it has no pivot. Begin with one that places the hand at ease, with the
longer fingers on the black keys, like B major for instance.”25
Exercises
Mikuli noted that Chopin’s students studied Clementi’s Préludes et Exercices in a
sequence corresponding to their scale practice.26 As his students progressed, Chopin also
assigned selections from Cramer’s Etudes, Clementi’s Gradus ad Parnassum,
Moscheles’s Stylstudien zur höheren Vollendung, J.S. Bach’s Suites, and fugues from
Das Wohltemperirte Clavier. 27 His most advanced students were also assigned selections
from his Etudes, Opp. 10 and 25.28
Carl Mikuli, foreword to Fr. Chopin’s’ Pianoforte-Werke, 17 vols., ed. Carl

24
Mikuli (Leipzig: Kistner, 1880), 3.
Frédéric Chopin, Projet de Méthode; quoted in Jean-Jacques, Eigeldinger,

25
Chopin: Pianist and Teacher as Seen By His Pupils, trans. Naomi Shohet with Krysia
Osostowicz and Roy Howat, ed. Roy Howat (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986), 34.
26
Mikuli, Fr. Chopin’s’ Pianoforte-Werke, 3.
27
Ibid., 3-4.
28
Ibid.
23
Chopin and Psychological Processes Involved in Playing the Piano
In the sketches for his method, Chopin differentiated between three categories of
technical study based on intervals: those based on adjacent notes, disjunct notes, and
double notes. Writing “there is nothing more to be invented for study as far as
mechanism of piano playing [Chopin’s italics] is concerned,” Chopin seemed to imply
the existence of other areas of study related to piano playing aside from what he termed,
the “mechanism.”29 Particular mention can be made of Chopin’s thoughts regarding
touch, sentiment, and psychological processes in approaching a piece of music.
With regard to his teaching style, Mikuli and Kleczynski each made reference to
Chopin’s attention to touch and tone. “A maximum of suppleness (‘facilement,
facilement’ [easily, easily] he would repeat tirelessly), and a cultivation of sensitivity of
hearing and touch—these were the purposes of the exercises he prescribed in the first
lessons.”30 Chopin’s philosophy also directed that, “any work selected for study should
be carefully analysed for its formal structure, as well as for the feelings and psychological
processes which it evokes.”31
As a pedagogue, Chopin advocated inspired concise practice. “He feared above
all . . . the abrutissement [stupefaction by overwork] of the pupils. One day he heard me
29
Frédéric Chopin, Projet de Méthode; quoted in Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger,
Chopin: Pianist and Teacher as Seen By His Pupils, ed. Roy Howat, trans. Naomi
Shohet with Krysia Osostowicz and Roy Howat (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1986), 25.
30
Eigeldinger, Chopin, 17.
Raoul Koczalski, Frédéric Chopin. Betrachtungen, Skizzen, Analysen (Köln:

31
Tischer & Jagenberg, 1936), 13.

24
say that I practiced six hours a day. He became quite angry, and forbade me to practise
more than three hours.”32 Dubois’s experience was corroborated by Gretsch as well. “He
always advised the pupil not to work for too long at a stretch and to intermit between
hours of work by reading a good book, by looking at masterpieces of art, or by taking an
invigorating walk.”33
Finally, as part of his teaching, Chopin’s students had ample opportunity to
observe and imitate their teacher. “Field’s and his own Nocturnes also figured to some
extent as Etudes, for through them the pupil would learn—partly from his explanations,
partly from observing and imitating Chopin, who played them indefatigably to the
pupil—to recognize, love and produce the beautiful ‘bound’ [gebunden] vocal tone and
the legato.”34
Chopin’s methods, revolutionary for their time in comparison to many of his
contemporaries, sound familiar to pianists of this day and age. His approach to both
composition and pedagogy was exceptional in that he intuitively demonstrated attitudes
and ideas which, having since been accepted and practiced ubiquitously amongst pianists,
are now finding support in the sciences. These aspects will be addressed in a subsequent
chapter.
Frederick Niecks, Frederick Chopin as a Man and Musician, Vol. II (London:

32
Novello, 1902), 183-4.
33
Grewingk, Eine Tochter Alt-Rigas, 20.
34
Mikuli, foreword to Fr. Chopin’s’ Pianoforte-Werke, 4.
25
CHAPTER 3
THE NEUROMUSCULAR SYSTEM, HAND PHYSIOLOGY, AND PIANO
PRACTICE AND PERFORMANCE: AN OVERVIEW OF SELECT ISSUES
The Nature-Nurture Debate
One of most enduring discussions in science and medicine concerns the nature-
nurture debate, an argument regarding the extent to which a person is a product of either
his or her genes or his or her environment and experiences.35 The debate has drawn
increasing interest, particularly with regard to human intellectual and physical
performance.
With respect to genetic influences and variability, molecular biologists have
attempted to identify single gene variants that might either lead to a particular disease or
profoundly impact individual performance. For example, efforts have been made to
identify sprinters and endurance runners on the basis of differing forms of a single gene.36
Rarely, however, is one gene solely responsible for a particular trait. Furthermore,
studies on human behavior have demonstrated that genes work in combined networks to
35
See V. J. Vitzthum, “A Number No Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts: The Use
and Abuse of Heritability,” Human Biology 75 (2003): 539-88; E. O. Wilson,
Sociobiology: The New Synthesis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975); H.
Hellman, Great Feuds in Science: Ten of the Liveliest Disputes Ever (New York: Wiley,
1998); S. Ceci and W. Williams, The Nature-Nurture Debate: The Essential Readings
(New York: Blackwell Publishing Co., 2000), and R. C. Lewontin, It Ain’t Necessarily
So: The Dream of the Human Genome and Other Illusions (London: Granta Books,
2000).
See A. Coghlan, “Elite Athletes Born to Run,” New Scientist 30 (2003): 4-5 and
36
N. Yang et al., “ACTN3 Genotype is Associated with Human Elite Athletic

Performance,” American Journal of Human Genetics 73 (2003): 627-31.
26
influence biological function.37 “All observable properties of an organism are determined
by the workings of a degenerate network of many genes.”38 “Degeneracy in gene
networks promotes evolutionary fitness of a species by ensuring that genetic diversity
supports functional adaptation to variable environments.”39
On the other hand, significant support for the importance of environment and
experience is drawn from studies involving skills such as cigar rolling40 and reading
inverted text,41 studies which have demonstrated a strong correlation between time spent
practicing and improvements in performance. Ericsson et al. also concluded that the
primary factor distinguishing violinists at different skill levels was the number of hours
spent in “deliberate practice,” practice characterized by focused attention; relevant,
effortful activities; and specific performance goals.42 While it has also been demonstrated
T. D. Johnston and L. Edwards, “Genes, Interactions and the Development of

37
Behaviour,” Psychological Review 109 (2002): 26-34.
G. M. Edelman and J. A. Gally, “Degeneracy and Complexity in Biological

38
Systems,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of

America 98 (2001): 13766.
K. Davids and J. Baker, “Genes, Environment and Sport Performance: Why the
39
Nature-Nurture Dualism is No Longer Relevant,” Sports Medicine 37(11) (2007): 975.
E. R. F. W. Crossman, “A Theory of the Acquisition of Speed-Skill,”

40
Ergonomics 2 (1959): 153-66.
P. A. Kolers, “Memorial Consequences of Automatized Encoding,” Journal of

41
Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 1 (1975): 689-701.
42
K. A. Ericsson, R. T. Krampe, and C. Tesch-Römer, “The Role of Deliberate
Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance,” Psychological Review 100 (1993):
363-406.
27
that expert athletes accumulate more training hours than non-experts,43 the notion that
simply acquiring a particular number of training hours to develop expertise has received
significant criticism. As noted by Davids and Baker, however, “there seems to be little
doubt that attention to high-quality training is critical for promoting the development of
expert performance.”44 That leads one to consider the processes involved in training and
the increasing emphasis on what appears to be, a complementary relationship between
nature and nurture since neither environmental nor genetic constraints are able to account
for all the data on performance variability.45
“The ‘complementary nature’ of phenomena in the natural world suggests that it
is highly important for geneticists to identify many single gene variants, although the role
of these genes in regulating behaviour needs to be framed by their overarching tendencies
to network and to cooperate or compete with environmental constraints.”46 One of the
formidable challenges facing behavioral researchers is that performance-related variables
are not completely predictable, and yet it seems reasonable that we might be able to better
43
See J. L. Starkes et al., “Deliberate Practice in Sports: What is it Anyway?” in
The Road to Excellence: The Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts, Sciences,
Sports and Games, ed. K. A. Ericsson (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996), 80-106; W. F.
Helsen, J. L. Starkes, and N. J. Hodges, “Team Sports and the Theory of Deliberate
Practice,” Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 20 (1998): 12-34; and T. Hodge and J.
Deakin, “Deliberate Practice and Expertise in the Martial Arts: The Role of Context in
Motor Recall,” Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 20 (1998): 260-79.
44
Davids and Baker, “Genes, Environment and Sport Performance,” 966.
J. A. S. Kelso and D. A. Engström, The Complementary Nature (Cambridge,

45
MA: MIT Press, 2006).
46
Davids and Baker, “Genes, Environment and Sport Performance,” 962-80.
28
understand a range of influence of particular variables which might affect performance.
The following will focus on integrating principles regarding the neuromuscular system
and hand physiology with piano practice and performance.
Skill Training and the Central Nervous System
The dynamic relationship of biological factors and environmental influences is
exemplified by research regarding the plasticity, or changing structure, of the central
nervous system in response to learning and experience.47 Morphological and functional
characteristics of the neuromuscular system change with chronic levels of physical
activity. These changes, or adaptations, affect performance variables such as muscle
contraction force, power, and the rate of force development (RFD).48 Research has
demonstrated that significant effects associated with motor training include neural
adaptations,49 such as experience-specific patterns of plasticity induced across the motor
K. A. Dodge, “The Nature-Nurture Debate and Public Policy,” Merrill-Palmer

47
Quarterly 50 (2004): 418-27.
See P. Aagaard et al., “A Mechanism for Increased Contractile Strength of

48
Human Pennate Muscle in Response to Strength Training: Changes in Muscle

Architecture,” Journal of Physiology 534 (2001): 613-23.
49
See P. Aagaard et al., “Neural Inhibition During Maximal Eccentric and
Concentric Quadriceps Contractions: Effects of Resistance Training,” Journal of Applied
Physiology 89 (2000): 2249-57; P. Aagaard et al., “Neural Adaptation to Resistance
Training: Changes in Evoked V-Wave and H-Reflex Responses,” Journal of Applied
Physiology 92 (2002): 2309-18; and M. Van Cutsem, J. Duchateau, and K. Hainuat,
“Changes in Single Motor Unit Behavior Contribute to the Increase in Contraction Speed
After Dynamic Training in Humans,” Journal of Physiology 513 (1998): 295-305.
29
cortex and spinal cord50 and changes in motor unit behavior and muscle. Furthermore,
with regard to both neural and physiological adaptations, the adaptations appear to be in
response to differential motor experience and training. The following discussion will
focus on neural plasticity associated with skill training.
Neural Plasticity
Significant evidence supporting the role of neural factors comes from studies
involving limb immobilization, aging, and those demonstrating phenomena particular to
strength training. For example, increases in strength occur in the first few weeks of
training prior to any significant increase in muscle mass.51 Furthermore, observed
50
See M. J. N. McDonagh and C. T. M. Davies, “Adaptive Response of
Mammalian Skeletal Muscle to Exercise with High Loads,” European Journal of Applied
Physiology 52 (1984): 139-55; D. G. Sale, “Neural Adaptation to Resistance Training,”
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 20 (1988): S135-45; R. M. Enoka, “Neural
Adaptations with Chronic Physical Activity,” Journal of Biomechanics 30 (1996): 447-
55; DeAnna L. Adkins et al., “Motor Training Induces Experience-Specific Patterns of
Plasticity Across Motor Cortex and Spinal Cord,” Journal of Applied Physiology 101
(2006): 1776-82; and D. Gabriel, G. Kamen, and G. Frost, “Neural Adaptations to
Resistive Exercise: Mechanisms and Recommendations for Training Practices,” Sports
Medicine 36 (2): 133-49.
51
See R. C. Hickson et al., “Successive Time Courses of Strength Development and
Steroid Hormone Responses to Heavy-Resistance Training,” Journal of Applied
Physiology 76 (1994): 663-70; D. A. Jones and O. M. Rutherford, “Human Muscle
Strength Training: The Effects of Three Different Regimes and the Nature of the
Resultant Changes,” Journal of Physiology (London) 391 (1987): 1-11; P. V. Komi,
“Training of Muscle Strength and Power: Interaction of Neuromotoric, Hypertrophic,
and Mechanical Factors,” International Journal of Sports Medicine 7 (1986): 10-5; N.
McCartney et al., “The Effects of Strength Training in Patients with Selected
Neuromuscular Disorder,” Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 20 (1988): 362-8;
M. V. Narici et al., “Changes in Forces, Cross-Sectional Areas and Neural Activation
During Strength Training and Detraining of the Human Quadriceps,” European Journal of
Applied Physiology 66 (1989): 310-9; and L. L. Ploutz et al., “Effect of Resistance
30
increases in strength are evident not only in the trained limb, but in the contralateral,
untrained limb as well, an effect known as cross-education.52 Finally, increases in
strength do not transfer to all activities in which the trained muscle is involved.53
While this evidence supports the likelihood that neural mechanisms are significant
in neuromuscular adaptations associated with physical activity and training, it has been
much more difficult to identify the particular mechanisms involved. This has led some
scientists to conclude that “the mechanisms mediating neuromuscular adaptations
probably vary across conditions, but, in general, must be related to the maximality,
specificity, or pattern of the neural drive to the muscle.”54 For example, most normally
active individuals find it difficult to maximally activate a particular muscle by voluntary
command which in turn limits the force one might elicit as well.55 It appears, however
that this ability may be influenced by one’s level of chronic physical activity.
Training on Muscle Use During Exercise,” Journal of Applied Physiology 76 (1994):

1675-81.
R. M. Enoka, “Muscle Strength and its Development: New Perspectives,”

52
Sports Medicine 6 (1988): 146-68.
53
O. M. Rutherford and D. A. Jones, “The Role of Learning and Coordination in
Strength Training,” European Journal of Applied Physiology 55 (1986): 100-5.
R. M. Enoka, “Neural Adaptations with Chronic Physical Activity,” Journal of

54
Biomechanics 30(5) (1997): 448.
See Allen et al., “Reliability of Measurements of Muscle Strength and Voluntary

55
Activation Using Twitch Interpolation,” Muscle & Nerve 18 (1995): 583-600; Adams et
al., “Mapping of Electrical Muscle Stimulation Using MRI,” Journal of Applied
Physiology 74 (1993): 532-7; R. M. Enoka and A. J. Fuglevand, “Neuromuscular Basis of
the Maximum Voluntary Force Capacity of Muscle,” in Current Issues in Biomechanics,
31
Motor Cortex
The primary motor cortex is organized into highly interconnected neural
assemblies that control discrete movements across different joints.56 Motor skill
acquisition apparently involves changes in the connectivity between these neural
assemblies,57 changes particular to the nature of one’s motor experience. With regard to
skill training, Adkins et al. suggest that these changes include synaptogenesis, synaptic
potentiation, and the reorganization of movement representations within motor cortex.58
ed. M. D. Grabiner (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1993), 215-35; F. Bellemare et al.,
“Motor-Unit Discharge Rates During Maximal Voluntary Contractions of Three Human
Muscles,” Journal of Neurophysiology 50 (1983): 1380-92; C. J. De Luca et al.,
“Behavior of Human Motor Units in Different Muscles During Linearly Varying
Contractions,” Journal of Physiology (London) 329 (1982): 113-28; A. Y. Belanger and
A. J. McComas, “Extent of Motor Unit Activation During Effort,” Journal of Applied
Physiology 51 (1981): 381-93; C. G. Kukulka and H. P. Clamann, “Comparison of the
Recruitment and Discharge Properties of Motor Units in Human Brachial Biceps and
Adductor Pollicis During Isometric Contractions,” Brain Research 219 (1981): 45-55; A.
W. Monster and H. Chan, “Isometric Force Production by Motor Units of Extensor
Digitorum Communis Muscle in Man,” Journal of Neurophysiology 40 (1977): 1432-43;
H. J. Freund, H. J. Büdingen, and V. Dietz, “Activity of Single Motor Units from Human
Forearm Muscles During Voluntary Isometric Contractions,” Journal of Neurophysiology
38 (1975): 933-46; and J. Tanji and M. Kato, “Firing Rate of Individual Motor Units in
Voluntary Contraction of Abductor Digit Minimi Muscle in Man,” Experimental
Neurology 40 (1973): 771-83.
56
See J. P. Donoghue and S. P. Wise, “The Motor Cortex of the Rat:
Cytoarchitecture and Microstimulation Mapping,” The Journal of Comparative
Neurology 212 (1982): 76-88; A. Keller, “Intrinsic Synaptic Organization of the Motor
Cortex,” Cerebral Cortex 3 (1993): 430-41; and Schieber, “Constraints on Somatotopic
Organization,” 2125-43.
M. Graziano, “The Organization of Behavioral Repertoire in Motor Cortex,”

57
Annual Review of Neuroscience 29 (2006): 105-34.
Adkins et al., “Motor Training Induces Experience-Specific Patterns of

58
32
Transcranial magnetic stimulation and neuroimaging studies have demonstrated
changes in the human motor cortex59 similar to results obtained in studies involving rats.60
Plasticity,” 1776-82.
59
See J. Classen et al., “Multimodal Output Mapping of Human Central Motor
Representation on Different Spatial Scales,” Journal of Physiology 512 (1998): 163-79;
M. Hund-Georgiadis and D. Y. von Cramon, “Motor-Learning-Related Changes in Piano
Players and Non-Musicians Revealed by Functional Magnetic-Resonance Signals,”
Experimental Brain Research 125 (1999): 417-25; A. Karni et al., “Functional MRI
Evidence for Adult Motor Cortex Plasticity During Motor Skill Learning,” Nature 377
(1995): 155-8; and A. Pascual-Leone et al., “The Role of Reading Activity on the
Modulation of Motor Cortical Outputs to the Reading Hand in Braille Readers,” Annals
of Neurology 34 (1993): 33-7.
60
See R. P. Allred and T. A. Jones, “Unilateral Ischemic Sensorimotor Cortical
Damage in Female Rats: Forelimb Behavioral Effects and Dendritic Structural Plasticity
in the Contralateral Homotopic Cortex,” Experimental Neurology 190 (2004): 433-45; S.
D. Bury and T. A. Jones, “Unilateral Sensorimotor Cortex Lesions in Adult Rats
Facilitate Motor Skill Learning with the “Unaffected” Forelimb and Training-Induced
Dendritic Structural Plasticity in the Motor Cortex,” Journal of Neuroscience 22 (2002):
8597-8606; W. T. Greenough, J. R. Larson, and G. S. Withers, “Effects of Unilateral and
Bilateral Training in a Reaching Task on Dendritic Branching of Neurons in the Rat
Motor-Sensory Forelimb Cortex,” Behavioral and Neural Biology 44 (1985): 301-14; T.
A. Jones, “Multiple Synapse Formation in the Motor Cortex Opposite Unilateral
Sensorimotor Cortex Lesions in Adult Rats,” Journal of Comparative Neurology 414
(1999) 57-66; T. A. Jones, C. J. Chu, L. A. Grande, and A. D. Gregory, “Motor Skills
Training Enhances Lesion-Induced Structural Plasticity in the Motor Cortex of Adult
Rats,” Journal of Neuroscience 19 (1999): 10153-63; J. A. Kleim et al., “Motor
Learning-Dependent Synaptogenesis is Localized to Functionally Reorganized Motor
Cortex,” Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 77 (2002): 63-77; J. A. Kleim, S.
Barbay, and R. J. Nudo, “Functional Reorganization of the Rat Motor Cortex Following
Motor Skill Learning,” Journal of Neurophysiology 80 (1998): 3321-25; J. A. Kleim et
al., “Cortical Synaptogenesis and Motor Map Reorganization Occur During Late, but Not
Early, Phase of Motor Skill Learning,” Journal of Neuroscience 24 (2004): 628-33; J. A.
Kleim et al., “Synaptogenesis and Fos Expression in the Motor Cortex of the Adult Rat
After Motor Skill Learning,” Journal of Neuroscience 16 (1996): 4529-35; and Y. Wang
et al., “Motor Learning Changes GABAergic Terminals on Spinal Motoneurons in
Normal Rats,” European Journal of Neuroscience 23 (2006): 141-50.
33
Individuals trained to produce skilled digit movements on a piano display an increase in
the area of digit representation corresponding to the trained hand and a decrease in motor-
evoked potential (MEP) threshold.61 Similar cortical changes have been observed in
blind braille readers62 and subjects trained in ankle63 and tongue tasks.64 Furthermore,
highly skilled volleyball players have larger map areas and more overlapping
representations of medial deltoid and carpi radialis muscles than runners, a finding
consistent with volleyball players’ acquisition of coordinated shoulder movement
sequences.65
A. Pascual-Leone et al., “Modulation of Muscle Responses Evoked by

61
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation During the Acquisition of New Fine Motor Skills,”
Journal of Neurophysiology 74 (1995): 1037-45.
62
See A. Pascual-Leone et al., “Modulation of Motor Cortical Outputs to the
Reading Hand of Braille Readers,” Annals of Neurology 34 (1993): 33-7; A. Pascual-
Leone, J. Grafman, and M. Hallett, “Procedural Learning and Prefrontal Cortex,” Annals
of the New York Academy of Sciences 769 (1995): 61-70; and Pascual-Leone et al., “The
Role of Reading Activity,” 910-15.
M. A. Perez et al., “Motor Skill Training Induces Changes in the Excitability of

63
the Leg Cortical Area in Healthy Humans,” Experimental Brain Research 159 (2004):
197-205.
P. Svensson et al., “Plasticity in Corticomotor Control of the Human Tongue

64
Musculature Induced by Tongue-Task Training,” Experimental Brain Research 152

(2003): 42-51.
F. Tyc, A. Boyadjian, and H. Devanne, “Motor Cortex Plasticity Induced by

65
Extensive Training Revealed by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Human,” The

European Journal of Neuroscience 21 (2005): 259-66.
34
Spinal Mechanisms
The spinal cord is the final common pathway involved in motor behavior, but the
ways in which it is specifically involved in motor skill are largely unknown. Research
involving operant conditioning of spinal reflexes has demonstrated how learning may
induce spinal cord plasticity. Specifically, studies involving operant conditioning of the
spinal stretch reflex (SSR) and its electrical analog, the H reflex, have shown that
humans,66 monkeys,67 and rats68 can gradually increase or decrease the SSR or H reflex.
A conditioned decrease in the H reflex is due to an increase in motoneuron firing
threshold whereas an increase in the reflex is the result of reduced inhibition of the
motoneuron.69 Decreasing the H reflex causes an increase of inhibitory synapses onto the
spinal cord70 and reduced motoneuron axon conductance.71
R. L. Segal et al., “Uncoupling of Human Short and Long Latency Stretch Reflex
66
Responses with Operant Conditioning,” Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 17

(2000): 17-22.
J. S. Carp and J. R. Wolpaw, “Motoneuron Properties After Operantly

67
Conditioned Increase in Primate H-Reflex,” Journal of Neurophysiology 73 (1995): 1365-

73.
68
X. Y. Chen, L. Chen, and J. R. Wolpaw, “Time Course of H-Reflex Conditioning
in the Rat,” Neuroscience Letters 302 (2001): 85-8.
See J. S. Carp and J. R. Wolpaw, “Motoneuron Plasticity Underlying Operantly

69
Conditioned Decrease in Primate H-Reflex,” Journal of Neurophysiology 72 (1994): 431-

42 and Carp and Wolpaw, “Motoneuron Properties,” 1365-73.
See K. C. Feng-Chen and J. R. Wolpaw, “Operant Conditioning of H-Reflex

70
Changes Synaptic Terminals on Primate Motoneurons,” Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 93 (1996): 9206-11 and Wang et al.,
“Motor Learning Changes GABAergic Terminals,” 141-50.
35
Several studies have demonstrated that changes in spinal reflexes also occur
during long-term training of more complex limb movements.72 Collectively, the data
indicate that operant conditioned motor skills induce alterations in the spinal cord.
Further studies are necessary, however, to better understand the exact nature of these
adaptations.
Motor Units
Several observations suggest the likelihood of motoneuron adaptation to training.
For example, in a study of motor units of the first dorsal interosseus, Adam, De Luca, and
Erim demonstrated that average firing rates, initial firing rates, and firing rate discharge
variability were all significantly lower for the dominant as opposed to the nondominant
hand.73 Furthermore, while several studies have demonstrated that humans are unable to
fully activate muscles voluntarily,74 some evidence suggests that adaptations in motor unit
J. S. Carp et al., “Operant Conditioning of Rat H-Reflex Affects Motoneuron

71
Axonal Conduction Velocity,” Experimental Brain Research 136 (2001): 269-73.
72
See J. Meyer-Lohmann, C. N. Christakos, and H. Wolf, “Dominance of the
Short-Latency Component in Perturbation Induced Electromyographic Responses of
Long-Trained Monkeys,” Experimental Brain Research 64 (1986): 393-9 and R. V. Ung
et al., “On the Potential Role of the Corticospinal Tract in the Control and Progressive
Adaptation of the Soleus H-Reflex During Backward Walking,” Journal of
Neurophysiology 94 (2005): 1133-42.
A. Adam, C. J. De Luca, and Z. Erim, “Hand Dominance and Motor Unit Firing
73
Behavior,” Journal of Neurophysiology 80 (1998): 1373-82.
74
See Enoka and Fuglevand, “Neuromuscular Basis,” 215-35; J. J. Dowling et al.,
“Are Humans Able to Voluntarily Elicit Maximum Muscle Force?” Neuroscience Letters
1994 (179): 25-8; S. Gandevia, “Spinal and Supraspinal Factors in Human Muscle
Fatigue,” Physiological Reviews 2001 (81): 1725-89; and C. A. Knight and G. Kamen,
36
activity may contribute to improvements in motor performance. On one hand, for
example, Kamen and Knight demonstrated that increases in the maximal rate of torque
development following six weeks of strength training were accompanied by increases in
the maximal discharge rate of motor units.75 This is significant since the force a muscle
exerts is dependent upon motor unit activity,76 specifically, the number of motor units
recruited and the rate at which they discharge action potentials. On the other hand, force
modulation training results in decreased recruitment thresholds in young adults and
reduced firing frequencies of motor units at percentages of maximal voluntary
contraction.77 This in turn allows more precise and accurate control with regard to
various increments of muscle force.78
“Adaptations in Muscular Activation of the Knee Extensor Muscles with Strength

Training in Young and Older Adults,” Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 11
(2001): 405-12.
75
G. Kamen and C. A. Knight, “Training-Related Adaptations in Motor Unit
Discharge Rate in Young and Older Adults,” The Journals of Gerontology. Series A,
Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 59 (2004): 1334-8.
E. Adrian and D. Bronk, “The Discharge of Impulses in Motor Nerve Fibres. II.
76
The Frequency of Discharges in Reflex and Voluntary Contractions,” Journal of

Physiology 204 (1929): 231-57.
C. Patten and G. Kamen, “Adaptations in Motor Unit Discharge Activity with

77
Force Control Training in Young and Older Human Adults,” European Journal of Applied
Physiology and Occupational Physiology 83 (2000): 128-43.
M. Bernardi et al., “Motor Unit Recruitment Strategy Changes with Skill

78
Acquisition,” European Journal of Applied Physiology 74 (1996): 52-9.

37
It is important to note that the force a muscle exerts during a voluntary contraction
is not constant. Instead, it is influenced by factors such as the intensity of the contraction,
the type of muscle contraction, the muscle group involved in the task, the level of
physiological arousal, and fatigue and therefore fluctuates around an average intended
value.79 This variability is exacerbated at low levels of force because recruited motor
units are contributing an unfused tetanus to the net force.80
α-Motoneurons
Properties of α-motoneurons change under a variety of conditions, during
development81 and following spinal cord injury,82 for example. Gardiner, Dai, and
79
See E. A. Christou, M. Grossman, and L. G. Carlton, “Modeling Variability of
Force During Isometric Quadriceps Femoris Muscle Contractions,” Journal of Motor
Behavior 34 (2002): 67-81; E. A. Christou, M Zelent, and L. G. Carlton, “Force Control
is Greater in Upper Compared with the Lower Extremity,” Journal of Motor Behavior 35
(2003): 322-4; M. E. Galganski, A. J. Fuglevand, and R. M. Enoka, “Reduced Control of
Motor Output in a Human Hand Muscle of Elderly Subjects During Submaximal
Contractions,” Journal of Neurophysiology 69 (1993): 2108-15; C. J. Mottram et al.,
“Frequency Modulation of Motor Unit Discharge Has Task-Dependent Effects on
Fluctuations in Motor Output,” Journal of Neurophysiology 94 (2005): 2878-87; and T.
Rudroff et al., “Net Excitation of the Motor Unit Pool Varied with Load Type During
Fatiguing Contractions,” Muscle & Nerve 29 (2005): 78-87.
80
See Z. Erim et al. “Rank-Ordered Regulation of Motor Units,” Muscle & Nerve
19 (1996): 563-73; V. G. Macefield, A. J. Fuglevand, and B. Bigland-Ritchie,
“Contractile Properties of Single Motor Units in Human Toe Extensors Assessed by
Intraneural Motor Axon Stimulation,” Journal of Neurophysiology 75 (1996): 2509-19;
Monster and Chan, “Isometric Force Production,” 1432-43; and C. T. Moritz et al.,
“Discharge Rate Variability Influences the Variation in Force Fluctuations Across the
Working Range of a Hand Muscle,” Journal of Neurophysiology 93 (2005): 2449-59.
N. Alessandri-Haber et al., “Molecular Determinants of Emerging Excitability in

81
Rat Embryonic Motoneurons,” Journal of Physiology 541 (2002): 25-39.

38
Heckman note that “these changes include changes in properties that would be expected
to alter the ways in which neurons, and neuronal circuits, translate and transfer excitation
patterns into trains of action potentials at the end organ.”83 They also cite the following
as known adaptations to α-motoneurons in response to exercise training: increased
dendritic arbor; increased protein synthesis and altered gene expression; altered ion
conductances in soma and the initial segment; increased axon transport of maintenance
proteins, neurotrophins and receptors; metabolic signals from muscles, and enhanced
neuromuscular transmission efficacy.84
While the functional implications of some of these adaptations are less obvious
and require further study, several of these adaptations likely have functional
consequences during endurance exercise. One significant observation is increased
synaptic efficacy resulting from enhanced neurotransmitter release occurring with
increased activity.85 The effect is decreased likelihood that neuromuscular propagation
might be impaired during sustained activation of the neuromuscular junction.
82
See E. Beaumont et al., “Passive Exercise and Fetal Spinal Cord Transplant Both
Help to Restore Motoneuronal Properties After Spinal Cord Transection in Rats,”
Muscle & Nerve 29 (2004): 234-42 and S. Hochman and D. McCrea, “Effects of Chronic
Spinalization on Ankle Extensor Motoneurons. II. Motoneuron Electrical Properties,”
Journal of Neurophysiology 71(1994): 1468-79.
P. Gardiner, Y. Dai, and C. J. Heckman, “Effects of Exercise Training on α-

83
Motoneurons,” Journal of Applied Physiology 101 (2006): 1228.
84
Ibid., 1229.
See A. Argaw, P. Desaulniers, and P. F. Gardiner, “Enhanced Neuromuscular

85
Transmission Efficacy in Overloaded Rat Plantaris Muscle,” Muscle & Nerve 29 (2004):
97-103; P. Desaulniers, P. A. Lavoie, and P. F. Gardiner, “Habitual Exercise Enhances
39
Further research is necessary to study motoneurons in conditions closer to those in
vivo during exercise.
Hand Physiology
Philosophies of piano practice with regard to motor learning and skill acquisition
continue to evolve in order to enhance efficiency and maintain physical health. Training
of skeletal muscle is a complicated issue with many interrelated variables, the
relationships of which may not be fully understood. Nevertheless, the aspiring pianist
may benefit from the most recent research regarding physiology and training techniques.
Discussion of basic properties of muscles, how muscles function, and issues particular to
the human hand will lay the foundation for considering physiological aspects of several
Chopin études.
Skeletal Muscles and Motor Units
Histochemical characteristics, those related to the composition of cells and tissues
in the body, and structural and behavioral characteristics underlie functional properties of
muscle such as the magnitude of force a muscle is capable of generating, the speed with
which force is developed, and the length of time force may be maintained.86 There are
two general categories of muscle fibers, fast twitch and slow twitch. The primary
Neuromuscular Transmission Efficacy of Rat Soleus Muscle in Situ,” Journal of Applied

Physiology 90 (2001): 1041-8; and M. Dorlöchter et al., “Effects of Enhanced Activity
on Synaptic Transmission in Mouse Extensor Digitorum Longus Muscle,” Journal of
Physiology 436 (1991): 283-92.
Walter F. Boron and Emile L. Boulpaep, Medical Physiology: A Cellular and

86
Molecular Approach (China: Elsevier Science, 2003), 147.

40
functional difference between them is the time required for each to reach peak tension.
Fast twitch, or type II fibers, require approximately one-seventh of the time required by
slow twitch, or type I fibers, to reach peak tension.87 Another significant difference
between muscle types is the length of time they are able to maintain force, in other words
the extent to which the muscles resist fatigue. Whereas slow-twitch fibers have the
ability to sustain moderate contractions for tens of minutes or even hours, fast-twitch
fibers, those fibers associated with maximal contractions of a muscle group, fatigue
within tens of seconds or minutes.88 The soleus in the lower leg is an example of a
muscle comprised of mainly slow-twitch fibers while muscles of the eye are mainly fast-
twitch. Interestingly, muscles of the human hand have a significantly greater proportion
of fast-twitch fibers than slow-twitch fibers in the dominant hand and vice versa.89
Structural Differences Within Individual Muscle Fibers
Muscle fibers comprise several types of proteins—myosin, actin, and six
accessory proteins. Although the contraction of muscle occurs as a result of a chain of
events associated with the interaction of actin and myosin, the characteristics of muscle
contractions are thought to be significantly related to the structure of myosin. Each
molecule of myosin is comprised of two heavy chains (HC) and four light chains (LC),
and different muscles express different forms of myosin heavy chains (MHC) and myosin
87
Ibid., 152.
88
Ibid., 1244.
L. Jósza et al., “Specific Fibre Composition of Human Hand and Arm Muscles,”
89
Handchirurgie 10 (3) (1978): 153-7.

41
light chains (MLC). Differences in the proportions in which these chains are expressed
are implicated in contraction velocity and result in several types of type II fibers.
Physiology of Movement Control
Speed
It is apparent that training-induced adaptations in contractile function and fiber-
type characteristics depend upon duration, intensity, frequency, and the type of training
program used. Results of current research indicate that resistance training enhances cross-
sectional area of muscle and force generated by muscle fibers while endurance training
increases maximal unloaded shortening velocity of muscles.
Exercise Training and Maximal Shortening Velocity (Vmax)
It is a consistent finding that dynamic, but not isometric training, increases
maximal shortening velocity (Vmax) of muscles. Isometric training is a type of strength
training in which joint angle and muscle length are maintained either by working against
an immovable force or in opposition to fixed resistance. On the other hand, dynamic
training keeps the joints and muscles moving. Examples of dynamic training include
biking, running, swimming, and weight training. Duchateau and Hainaut found that three
months of isometric training at peak voluntary force failed to alter Vmax, but a similar
period of dynamic training performed at a resistance equivalent to thirty to forty percent
of peak force increased Vmax by twenty-one percent.90 It is thought that this increase may
be the result of an increase in the Vmax of individual fibers expressing a particular MHC
90
J. Duchateau and K. Hainaut, “Isometric or Dynamic Training: Differential
Effects on Mechanical Properties of a Human Muscle,” Journal of Applied Physiology
56(2) (1984): 296-301.
42
isoform.91 Strength training increases the number of Type IIa MHC at the expense of
fibers expressing Types IIx or IIb MHC. Because human skeletal muscle fibers
expressing either IIb or IIx MHC have greater maximal shortening velocity than fibers
expressing Type IIa MHC (R. H. Fitts and J. J. Widrick, unpublished data 1995),92 a
change in MHC expression would be expected to affect the Vmax of the whole muscle.
Force
Two basic types of training influence both the force a muscle is capable of
generating and its ability to resist fatigue. Endurance training promotes increased
resistance to fatigue and therefore greater ability to maintain submaximal power output
while strength training facilitates the ability to generate greater force.93
Strength is defined as the capacity to exert force under a particular set of
biomechanical conditions; however, most movements arise from the cooperation of a
number of muscles acting together. The amount of force that can be generated in a
particular movement is therefore determined not only by intramuscular factors but by the
relative coordination of muscles as well. While it is likely that neural adaptations
contribute to increases in strength by facilitating coordination amongst muscles, it is
widely documented that resistance training can lead, not only to neural adaptations, but
R. H. Fitts and J. J. Widrick, “Muscle Mechanics: Adaptations with Exercise-

91
Training,” Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews 24 (1996): 427-73.
See L. Larsson and R. L. Moss, “Maximum Velocity of Shortening in Relation

92
to Myosin Isoform Composition in Single Fibres From Human Skeletal Muscles,” The
Journal of Physiology 472(1) (1993): 595-614 and R. H. Fitts and J. J. Widrick,
unpublished data, 1995.
Boron and Boulpaep, Medical Physiology, 1244.

93
43
changes in structural and histochemical properties of muscle resulting in increased
muscular strength.
Gradation of Force
Properties of muscle are dependent upon a balance of characteristics which
facilitate the variety of movements of which human beings are capable. Of primary
importance to the pianist is the ability to control the speed at which the piano key
descends which is in turn dependent upon the force with which it is depressed. The
ability to depress piano keys with an infinite variety of movements relies on the ability to
exert force in such a way that movements are both smooth and graded. Muscle fibers
belonging to a single motor unit are all of the same type but may interdigitate with those
from another. The interdigitation, together with the orderly recruitment of motor units,
permits a graded response that is evenly distributed through the cross section of the
muscle.
Not only are musicians more accurate than non-musicians in reaching a desired
force, but musicians also exhibit better control over the fingers at all levels of force.94 It
has also been demonstrated that accuracy of force production increases as a function of
practice, and this accuracy is largely attributed to neural adaptation and/or motor
learning.95 Deficient coordination, or the inability of muscles to contract at the most
S. M. Slobounov et al., “Modulated Cortical Control of Individual Fingers in

94
Experienced Musicians: An EEG Study,” Clinical Neurophysiology 113 (2002): 2013-

24.
H. Chiang, S. M. Slobounov, and W. Ray, “Practice-Related Modulations of

95
Force Enslaving and Cortical Activity as Revealed by EEG,” Clinical Neurophysiology

44
optimal force levels for a particular motor task, is largely related to high brain
mechanisms including the neocortex, basal ganglia, cerebellum, and brainstem.
Force and Efficiency
Two-joint and multi-joint muscles
Many muscles in the human body, including those crossing the wrist and all
finger joints, cross two or more joints. Because the amount of tension present in any
muscle is essentially constant throughout its length as well as at the sites of tendinous
attachment to bone, these muscles affect motion at both or all of the joints crossed. One
disadvantage associated with two-joint and multi-joint muscles is known as active
insufficiency. Active insufficiency refers to the fact that two-joint and multi-joint
muscles are incapable of shortening to the extent required to produce a full range of
motion at all joints simultaneously. For example, finger flexors are unable to produce as
tight a fist when the wrist is in flexion as when it is in a neutral position.
Bilateral deficit
In normally active individuals, the maximum force a muscle can exert decreases
when the homologous muscle in the contralateral limb is activated concurrently.96 In
115 (2004): 1033-43.
See T. Ohtsuki, “Decrease in Human Voluntary Isometric Arm Strength Induced

96
by Simultaneous Bilateral Exertions,” Behavioural Brain Research 7 (1983): 165-78; P.

Schantz et al., “Maximal Voluntary Force of Bilateral and Unilateral Leg Extension,”
Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 136 (1989): 185-92; N. J. Secher, S. Rorsgarrd, and O.
Secher, “Contralateral Influence on Recruitment of Curarized Muscle Fibres During
Maximal Voluntary Extension of the Legs,” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 103 (1978):
456-62; and N. H. Secher, N. Rube, and J. Ellers, “Strength of Two- and One- Leg
Extension in Man,” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 134 (1988): 333-39.
45
most people, the bilateral deficit during slow contractions is less than twenty percent,97
but for rapid contractions it has been reported to be as high as twenty-five to forty-five
percent.98 Interestingly enough, bilateral deficit can be obviated with training.99 For
example, individuals who participate in training that requires concurrent activation of
homologous muscles with intense contractions but not other types of training, rowers and
weightlifters, for example, have been observed to exhibit a bilateral facilitation rather
than a bilateral deficit.100 In these subjects, the maximum force a muscle can exert occurs
during a bilateral rather than a unilateral contraction.
The Fingers and Thumb
Finger Independence
While humans seem to demonstrate significant independence amongst the digits
in daily activities, they apparently lack the ability to move the fingers completely
97
See J. D. Howard and R. M. Enoka, “Maximum Bilateral Contractions are
Modified by Neurally Mediated Interlimb Effects,” Journal of Applied Physiology 70
(1991): 306-16 and T. J. Koh, M. D. Grabiner, and C. A. Clough, “Bilateral Deficit is
Larger for Step Than for Ramp Isometric Contractions,” Journal of Applied Physiology
74(3) (1993): 1200-5.
98
See Koh, Grabiner, and Clough, “Bilateral Deficit,” 1200-5 and A. A.
Vandervoort, D. G. Sale, and J. Moro, “Comparison of Motor Unit Activation During
Unilateral and Bilateral Leg Extension,” Journal of Applied Physiology 56 (1984): 46-
51.
N. Rube and N. H. Secher, “Effect of Training on Central Factors in Fatigue

99
Following Two- and One-Leg Static Exercise in Man,” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica
141 (1990): 87-95.
See Howard and Enoka, “Maximum Bilateral Contractions,” 306-16 and N. H.

100
Secher, “Isometric Rowing Strength of Experienced and Inexperienced Oarsmen,”

Medicine and Science in Sports 7 (1975): 280-3.
46
independently. For example, studies by Schieber, Häger-Ross and Schieber, and Lang
and Schieber have shown that primates and humans are unable to voluntarily flex one
finger without incurring movement of the other fingers as well.101 This phenomenon has
been referred to as “enslavement.” It appears that the degree to which one finger is
enslaved to another is influenced by whether the finger is the index, middle, ring, or little
finger and the speed with which a particular movement is performed. Häger-Ross and
Schieber have shown that the index finger is more independent than the other fingers,
followed by the little, middle, and ring fingers, respectively, and that movements
performed with greater speed tend to be less individuated than those performed more
slowly.102 Perhaps surprisingly, it appears that hand dominance is not a significant factor
affecting finger independence as research by Reilly has shown no difference between the
individuation of the digits on the preferred and non-preferred hands during force
production with single digits in isolation.103 The question then arises as to how neural and
motor organization may impact the human ability to move the fingers and whether or not
See Marc H. Schieber, “Individuated Finger Movements of Rhesus Monkeys:

101
A Means of Quantifying the Independence of the Digits,” Journal of Neurophysiology 65

(1991): 1381-91 and C. Häger-Ross and M. H. Schieber, “Quantifying the Independence
of Human Finger Movements: Comparisons of Digits, Hands, and Movement
Frequencies,” Journal of Neuroscience 20(22) (2000): 8542-50; and Catherine Lang and
Marc H. Schieber, “Differential Impairment of Individuated Finger Movements in
Humans After Damage to the Motor Cortex or the Corticospinal Tract,” Journal of
Häger-Ross and Schieber, “Quantifying the Independence,” 8542-50.

102
K. T. Reilly, M. A. Nordstrom, and M. H. Schieber, “Short-Term

103
Synchronization Between Motor Units in Different Functional Subdivisions of the

Human Flexor Digitorum Profundus Muscle,” Journal of Neurophysiology 92 (2004):
734-42.
47
the ability might be amenable to adaptation or learning. Chiang, Slobounov, and Ray
have suggested that finger control is not hard-wired but instead plastic and influenced by
deliberate practice,104 a position supported by that fact that musicians demonstrate greater
independence of the digits than non-musicians.105 While significant debate exists as to
the mechanisms underlying finger independence, it is thought that, through practice,
central control of movement of the fingers may be differentially developed in musicians
in comparison with non-musicians who perhaps have less opportunity to practice
individualized movements.106
The Thumb
While at least one study suggests that the thumb is treated, not as a special digit,
but as another finger by the nervous system,107 there are several anatomical and
physiological reasons why the thumb has often been considered separate from the fingers.
Most obviously, the thumb is capable of rotary and three-dimensional movement while
movements of the other four digits involve primarily flexion and extension.
Anatomically, the thumb’s expanded metacarpal head and three additional muscles add
Chiang et al., “Practice-Related Modulations,” 1033-43.

104
Slobounov et al., “Modulated Cortical Control,” 2013-24.

105
Ibid.
106
107
Halla Olafsdottir, Vladimir M. Zatsiorsky, and Mark L. Latash, “Is the Thumb
a Fifth Finger? A Study of Digit Interaction During Force Production Tasks,”
Experimental Brain Research 160 (2005): 203-13.
48
strength and refined motor control to its movements108 while lacking the multi-digit,
multi-tendon muscles that are involved in finger action.109
The structure of the thumb has evolved from non-human primates to humans,110
and its development has apparent ramifications in the brain as well. One study in
particular has demonstrated that the representations of the thumb in the brain are very
large and disparate from those of the fingers111 although recent work by Schieber
challenges these results. 112 Patterns of brain activation involving the thumb also appear to
be different than those involving the fingers. Two separate studies have shown that
sensorimotor processing in the primary motor cortex and somatosensory cortices is
different for the thumb and middle finger, an observation which is thought to indicate that
specific somatosensory processing for the thumb may provide information for the motor
R. L. Susman, “Fossil Evidence for Early Hominid Tool Use,” Science 265
108
(1994): 1570-3.
K. L. Moore and A. F. Dalley, “The Upper Limb,” in Clinically Oriented

109
Anatomy, 5th ed. (Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006), 726-885.
See J. Napier, “The Evolution of the Hand,” Scientific American 207 (1962): 56-
110
62; Susman, “Fossil Evidence,” 1570-3; and Idem, “Hand Function and Tool Behavior in
Early Hominids,” Journal of Human Evolution 35 (1998): 23-46.
W. Penfield and E. Boldrey, “Somatic Motor and Sensory Representation in the

111
Cerebral Cortex of Man as Studied by Electrical Stimulation,” Brain 60 (1937): 389-443.
M. H. Schieber, “Constraints on Somatotopic Organization in the Primary

112
Motor Cortex,” Journal of Neurophysiology 86 (2001): 2125-43.

49
cortex for fine motor control.113 Furthermore, Hamada has shown differences in patterns
of cortical activation during movements of the thumb and index finger suggesting that
sensory information from the index finger is processed more bilaterally than from the
thumb.114
Pianists and Hand Physiology
Knowledge of hand physiology is pertinent to pianists for several reasons. First, a
basic understanding of muscles in the wrist and fingers encourages conscious choices in
hand and wrist position which in turn facilitate ease and variety of movement.
Furthermore, it is possible to train muscles and to therefore alter some of the properties
they exhibit including behavioral characteristics. This is significant since, due to the
demands of piano playing, pianists require muscles that are capable of contracting
quickly but that are also resistant to fatigue.
Quite interestingly, there appear to be some similarities and yet some differences
in the way the thumb and fingers are treated by the nervous system. Not only do the
thumb and fingers differ in their structure, but it is also apparent that patterns of brain
activation involving them are also somewhat different. Because of these differences,
particular attention should be given to the development of the thumb as well as the
fingers.
See Masato Tanosaki et al., “Specific Somatosensory Processing in

113
Somatosensory Area 3b for Human Thumb: A Neuromagnetic Study,” Clinical

Neurophysiology 112 (2001): 1516-22 and J. Jarvelainen and M. Schurmann, “The
Motor Cortex Approximately 20 Hz Rhythm Reacts Differently to Thumb and Middle
Finger Stimulation: An MEG Study,” NeuroReport 13 (2002): 1243-46.
Y. Hamada, et al., “Different Laterality Between the Thumb and Index Finger in
114
Human SII Activities,” NeuroReport 11 (2000): 3603-06.

50
It is clear that musicians demonstrate neural as well as muscular adaptations in
their abilities to grade force and move the fingers independently. Evidence
demonstrating training-induced adaptations in muscle has shown that results are
dependent upon the duration, intensity, frequency, and the type of training program used.
The implications for pianists suggest specificity in how one practices, what one practices,
and the results one desires.

51
CHAPTER 4
SKILL ACQUISITION: SENSORIMOTOR LEARNING
Human beings interact with their environment via their motor repertoire, but
changes in a person’s environment, body, or task require motor learning to facilitate
corresponding changes in motor performance. Some of the changes experienced by
humans are a result of physical maturation or disease, but others are associated with the
desire to learn new skills. In order to optimize strategies of learning, theorists and
researchers continue to study the acquisition and development of skills, topics that have
attracted their interest since the beginnings of modern psychology.
With regard to motor learning, musicians are a particularly unique population
since their training is largely devoted, not to the development of strength or endurance,
but to skill acquisition resulting in technical facility, coordination, and artistic control.
Based upon current research and information regarding processes involved in motor
learning, numerous parameters of pianists’ training have the potential to influence their
learning and performance.
Feedback
“Feedback” refers to information used for motor control and learning.115 Despite
differences amongst several theories of learning, there is general agreement that motor
learning appears to be strongly facilitated by the availability of feedback during
R. A. Schmidt and T. D. Lee, Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral

115
Emphasis, 3rd ed. (Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999).

52
learning.116 Salmoni, Schmidt, and Walter, for example, suggest that “information
provided by the sense organs—usually termed feedback is almost without dispute
considered critical for learning new motor actions.”117
Stages of Learning, Specificity of Practice, and Feedback
Debate continues as to the degree to which feedback is used during skill
acquisition.118 Two theories have emerged, however. One view highlights the
importance of feedback during early stages of motor learning and suggests that, with
practice, gradual online, feedback-based control diminishes.119 Specifically, proponents
of this view suggest that motor skill progresses from an initial stage, in which slow
performance is under close sensory guidance, through an intermediate stage to an
advanced stage in which movements may be rapid and automated.
The other theory concerns the specificity of practice and suggests that
performance is specific to the sources of afferent information available during practice.120
116
See J. A. Adams, “A Closed-Loop Theory of Motor Learning,” Journal of
Motor Behavior 9 (1971): 111-150; I. M. Bilodeau, “Information Feedback,” in
Acquisition of Skill, ed. E. A. Bilodeau (New York: Academic Press, 1966), 255-96; and
R. A. Schmidt, “A Schema Theory of Discrete Motor Skill Learning,” Psychological
Review 82 (1975): 225-60.
117
Alan W. Salmoni et al., “Knowledge of Results and Motor Learning: A Review
and Critical Reappraisal,” Psychological Bulletin 95(3) (1984): 356.
Olave Krigolson and Geraldine Van Gyn, “Is There ‘Feedback’ During Visual
118
Imagery? Evidence From a Specificity of Practice Paradigm,” Canadian Journal of

Experimental Psychology 60(1) (2006): 24-32.
R. W. Pew, “Acquisition of Hierarchical Control Over the Temporal

119
Organization of a Skill,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 71(5) (1966): 764-71.

120
See E. J. Gibson, Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development (New
53
In other words, a person’s skill in a transfer condition will be affected by the degree to
which feedback in the acquisition and transfer conditions is similar.121 For example,
regarding musicians who intend to perform from memory, the specificity of practice
hypothesis suggests that they will be most successful if also practicing from memory.
Furthermore, if one has practiced from memory but performs with music, performance
will likely be disrupted.
Auditory Feedback
Feedback in music learning and performance is of several types: tactile;
proprioceptive; visual regarding hand position, etc.; visual as it may relate to reading
notation; and auditory. What impact does auditory feedback have on motor
performance? Early attempts to address the question suggest that altered auditory
feedback disrupts feedback control of sequence production.122 However, it is apparent
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969); L. Proteau et al., “On the Type of Information

Used to Control and Learn an Aiming Movement after Moderate and Extensive Practice,”
Human Movement Science 6 (1987): 181-9; L. Proteau and J. Cournoyer, “Vision of the
Stylus in a Manual Aiming Task: The Effects of Practice,” Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology 42A (1990): 811-28; and L. Proteau et al., “A Sensorimotor
Basis for Motor Learning: Evidence Indicating Specificity of Practice,” The Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A 44(3) (1992): 557-75.
121
See J. A. Adams, D. Gopher, and G. Lintern, “Effects of Visual and
Proprioceptive Feedback on Motor Learning,” Journal of Motor Behavior 9 (1977): 11-
22; D. Elliot, and M. Jaeger, “Practice and the Visual Control of Manual Aiming
Movements,” Journal of Human Movement Studies, 14, (1988): 279-91; Proteau and
Cournoyer, “Vision of the Stylus in a Manual Aiming Task,” 811-28; and Proteau,
Marteniuk, and Lévesque, “A Sensorimotor Basis for Motor Learning,” 557-75.
122
See J. W. Black, “The Effect of Delayed Side-Tone Upon Vocal Rate and
Intensity,” Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders 16 (1951): 56-60; R. A. Chase, “An
Information-Flow Model of the Organization of Motor Activity. I: Transduction,
Transmission and Central Control of Sensory Information,” Journal of Nervous & Mental
54
from studies involving speech that many, but not all, alterations of auditory feedback
disrupt performance.123 Finney124 and Pfordresher125 provided evidence that some
alterations of auditory feedback fail to disrupt music performance while several studies
have demonstrated that performance often proceeds unhindered despite the absence of
feedback. While discussion continues, Finney and Palmer suggest that, “even if sound is
not necessary for an adequate level of performance in music, it might be important for
learning or recall.”126 Repp also explicitly makes the claim that auditory feedback is
important for music learning.127
Disease 140 (1965): 239-51; F. Fairbanks, “Systematic Research in Experimental

Phonetics: 1. A Theory of the Speech Mechanism as a Servosystem,” Journal of Speech
and Hearing Disorders 19 (1954): 133-39; G. Fairbanks and N. Guttman, “Effects of
Delayed Auditory Feedback Upon Articulation,” Journal of Speech & Hearing Research
1 (1958): 12-22; and B. S. Lee, “Some Effects of Side-Tone Delay,” Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 22 (1950): 639-40.
G. J. Borden, “An Interpretation of Research on Feedback Interruption in

123
Speech,” Brain & Language 7 (1979): 307-19.
S. A. Finney, “Auditory Feedback and Musical Keyboard Performance,” Music

124
Perception 15 (1997): 153-74.
P. Q. Pfordresher, “Auditory Feedback in Music Performance: The Role of

125
Melodic Structure and Musical Skill,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human

Perception & Performance 29 (2005): 1331-45.
Steven A. Finney, and Caroline Palmer, “Auditory Feedback and Memory for
126
Music Performance: Sound Evidence for an Encoding Effect,” Memory & Cognition
31(1) (2003): 51-64.
Bruno Repp, “Effects of Auditory Feedback Deprivation on Expressive Piano

127
Performance,” Music Perception 16(4) (1999): 409-38.

55
Visual Feedback
Previous research has suggested that proprioceptive and visual feedback
indicating the initial location of limbs is critical to facilitating accurate planning of
movements.128 To determine how visual and proprioceptive information is combined in
perception, scientists often employ distortion techniques to dissociate the usually
corresponding relationship between vision and proprioception. Under these conditions
which involve either optical prisms or virtual reality environments, subjects perceive their
hand to be in a location in between those specified by either vision or proprioception.129
See M. Favilla, W. Hening, and C. Ghez, “Trajectory Control in Targeted Force

128
Impulses. VI. Independent Specification of Response Amplitude and Direction,”

Experimental Brain Research 75 (1989): 280-94; C. Ghez, W. Hening, and J. Gordon,
“Organization of Voluntary Movement,” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 1 (1991):
664-71; C. Ghez et al., “Discrete and Continuous Planning of Hand Movements and
Isometric Force Trajectories,” Experimental Brain Research 115 (1997): 217-33; J.
Gordon and C. Ghez, “Trajectory Control in Targeted Force Impulses. II. Pulse Height
Control,” Experimental Brain Research 67 (1987a): 241-52; Idem, “Trajectory Control
in Targeted Force Impulses. III. Compensatory Adjustments for Initial Errors,”
Experimental Brain Research 67 (1987b): 253-69; J. Gordon et al., “Accuracy of Planar
Reaching Movements. II. Systematic Extent Errors Resulting from Inertial Anisotropy,”
Experimental Brain Research 99 (1994a): 112-30; D. A. Rosenbaum, “Human
Movement Initiation: Specification of Arm, Direction, and Extent,” Journal of
Experimental Psychology. General 109 (1980): 444-74; and Y. Rossetti, M. Desmerget,
and C. Problanc, “Vectorial Coding of Movement: Vision, Proprioception, or Both?”
See C. S. Harris, “Perceptual Adaptation to Inverted, Reversed, and Displaced

129
Vision,” Psychological Review 72 (1965): 419-44; J. C. Hay, H. L. Pick, and K. Ikeda,

“Visual Capture Produced by Prism Spectacles,” Psychonomic Science 2 (1965): 215-6;
H. L. Pick, D. H. Warren, and J. C. Hay, “Sensory Conflict in Judgments of Spatial
Direction,” Perception and Psychophysics 6 (1969): 203-5; R. J. Van Beers et al., “How
Humans Combine Simultaneous Proprioceptive and Visual Position Information,”
Experimental Brain Research 111 (1996): 253-61; Idem, “Integration of Proprioceptive
and Visual Position-Information: An Experimentally Supported Model,” Journal of
Neurophysiology 81 (1999): 1355-64; D. H. Warren, “Response Factors in Intermodality
Localization Under Conflict Conditions,” Perception and Psychophysics 27 (1980): 28-
56
Most of these studies have indicated that subjects perceive a hand position that is biased
toward the position indicated by vision. This evidence suggests that, at least in some
circumstances, visual feedback is a very important if not somewhat dominant source of
afferent information.
Multi-Sensory Integration
It has been suggested that different types of representations built from reading
music are based on complex relevant visual patterns, explicit knowledge of musical
structure,130 rules governing music perception in the auditory modality, or the likely co-
existence and interaction of such representations.131 While musicians are intimately
familiar with auditory imagery, prior to recent use of functional imaging techniques, it
has been difficult for the scientific community to substantiate the presence of this internal
phenomenon. Recent research by Schön and Besson substantiates the likelihood that
musicians have an auditory-like representation of the written music before they play it
and suggests that, while visuomotor coding may be sufficient to play written notes, an
anticipated auditory representation of written music is important for an expressive
performance that assigns different significance to each note based upon its structural
32; and D. H. Warren and W. T. Cleaves, “Visual-Proprioceptive Interaction Under

Large Amounts of Conflict,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 90 (1971): 206-14.
Daniele Schön and Mireille Besson, “Visually Induced Auditory Expectancy in

130
Music Reading: A Behavioral and Electrophysiological Study,” Journal of Cognitive

Neuroscience 17(4) (April 2005): 694-705.
See Idem, “Processing Pitch and Duration in Music Reading: A RT-ERP

131
Study,” Neuropsychologia 40 (2002a): 868-78 and D. Schön, C. Semenza, and G. Denes,

“Naming of Musical Notes: A Selective Deficit in One Musical Clef,” Cortex 37 (2001):
407-21.
57
function.132 This hypothesis, that written music may induce both musical auditory
expectancy and motor expectancy, may in fact influence the way music is perceived by
performers and audiences.
Audio-Motor Coupling
Playing a musical instrument places great demands upon the human motor and
auditory systems due to the speed and accuracy required in the coordination of
movements and the necessary ability to perceive fine nuances aurally.133 Musicians
demonstrate high-level function of both the motor and auditory systems and plasticity of
the auditory and motor cortices as well.134 Not only have researchers been interested in
the function and plasticity of these systems individually but in the likely interaction of the
two systems as well.
As utilized by Baumann et al. and other scientists, the term “transmodal” refers
both to activity in the motor cortex elicited by auditory stimulation and to activity in the
auditory cortex elicited by movements.135 It is significant that Whiteside made reference
to just such a relationship. “The player is told often enough that listening to oneself is the
Schön and Besson, “Visually Induced Auditory Expectancy,” 694-705.

132
133
Simon Baumann et al., “A Network for Audio-Motor Coordination in Skilled
Pianists and Non-Musicians,” Brain Research 1161 (2007): 65-78.
See T. F. Münte, E. Altenmüller, and L. Jäncke, “The Musician’s Brain as a

134
Model of Neuroplasticity,” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 3 (2002): 473-8 and G.

Schlaug, “The Brain of Musicians: A Model for Functional and Structural Adaptation,”
Biological Foundations of Music 930 (2001): 281-99.
Baumann et al., “Audio-Motor Coordination,” 67.

135
58
important thing in practice and performance. But he should be told more often that the
physical action of the performer conditions his listening.”136 Furthermore, she highlighted
the importance of improvisation because of such a relationship between the auditory and
motor areas. “Improvisation was another of her prime tools. It was used with two goals
in mind: involving the ear and creating a basic rhythm in the student. . . . The improviser
does not strike one note and then stop to decide what note to play next. From the
standpoint of the ear, improvisation establishes the most immediate relationship between
what the ear images and the playing mechanism performs.”137
Evidence for transmodal activity was first based on the language processing
studies of Aboitiz and Garcia138 and the research of Watkins and Paus139 and Watkins et
al. 140 involving speech perception. Studies in speech production by Doupe and Kuhl141
and Hickok and Poeppel were also significant.142 These studies involving language

136
Ibid., 23.
137
F. Aboitiz and R. Garcia, “The Anatomy of Language Revisited,” Biological

138
Research 30(4) (1997): 171-83.
K. Watkins and T. Paus, “Modulation of Motor Excitability During Speech

139
Perception: The Role of Broca’s Area,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16(6) (2004):
978-87.
K. E. Watkins, A. P. Strafella, and T. Paus, “Seeing and Hearing Speech Excites

140
the Motor System Involved in Speech Production,” Neuropsychologia 41(8) (2003): 989-
94.
141
A. J. Doupe and P. K. Kuhl, “Birdsong and Human Speech: Common Themes
and Mechanisms,” Annual Review of Neuroscience 22 (1999): 567-31.
59
provided the groundwork for research investigating brain activity in motor performance
in music.143 Studies by Bangert, Haeusler, and Altenmüller,144 Bangert and Altenmüller,145
Bangert et al.,146 and Baumann et al.147 have since focused upon the interaction of the two
modalities.
With regard to piano practice, Bangert et al. concluded that “after practice,
cortical auditory and sensorimotor hand areas are jointly activated for purely auditory as
well as for mute motor tasks.” Furthermore “the degree of similarity [in activation]
correlates to the accumulated practice time.”148 Classen et al. found that corepresentation
of the areas is established during the first few minutes of training and is consolidated
G. Hickok and D. Poeppel, “Dorsal and Ventral Streams: A Framework for

142
Understanding Aspects of the Functional Anatomy of Language,” Cognition 92 (2004):

131-8.
143
See M. Lotze et al., “The Musician’s Brain: Functional Imaging of Amateurs
and Professionals During Performance and Imagery,” NeuroImage 20 (2003): 1817-29
and I. G. Meister et al., “Playing Piano in the Mind—An fMRI Study on Music Imagery
and Performance in Pianists,” Cognitive Brain Research 19 (2004): 219-28.
M. Bangert, U. Haeusler, and E. O. Altenmüller, “On Practice: How the Brain

144
Connects Piano Keys and Piano Sounds,” Biological Foundations of Music 930 (2001):
425-8.
145
M. Bangert and E. O. Altenmüller, “Mapping Perception to Action in Piano
Practice: A Longitudinal DC-EEG Study,” BMC Neuroscience 4 (2003),
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/4/26.
Bangert et al., “Shared Networks for Auditory and Motor Processing in

146
Professional Pianists,” 917-26.
Baumann et al., “A Network for Audio-Motor Coordination,” 65-78.

147
Bangert, Haeusler, and Altenmüller, “On Practice,” 427.

148
60
within weeks. Furthermore, the researchers hypothesized that this process may provide
the basis for further skill achievement.149
The aforementioned sensorimotor corepresentation appears to be largely
automatized and, perhaps surprisingly, can be activated preattentively.150 Haueisen and
Knösche demonstrated that pianists listening to well-studied piano music exhibit
unconscious contralateral primary motor cortical activity which demonstrates that
information transfer from the auditory to motor system has, at the very least, an
involuntary component.151
Transmodal activity is observed in non-musicians as well as musicians. Lahav et
al.152 have demonstrated that non-musicians are capable of forming audio-motor
interactions with training, and it is thought that the “previous existence of an audio-motor
network is probably crucial for fast formation of interactions.”153 Not surprising
therefore, is what appears to be a strong overlap in audio-motor networks associated with
J. Classen et al., “Rapid Plasticity of Human Cortical Movement

149
Representation Induced by Practice,” Journal of Neurophysiology 79 (1998): 1117-23.
S. Koelsch, E. Schroger, and M. Tervaniemi, “Superior Pre-Attentive Auditory

150
Processing in Musicians,” Neuroreport 10 (1999): 1309-13.
J. Haueisen and T. R. Knösche, “Involuntary Motor Activity in Pianists

151
Evoked by Music Perception,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 13(6) (2001): 786-92.
A. Lahav et al., “The Power of Listening: Auditory-Motor Interactions in

152
Musical Training,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1060 (2005): 189-94.
Baumann et al., “A Network for Audio-Motor Coordination,” 73.

153
61
language tasks and musical tasks. 154 Furthermore, “Speech, song and instrumental music
performance have in common that feedback processes and an anticipation of the
produced sound play an important role in all of them.”155
Although non-musicians demonstrate transmodal activity with training, it is
significant that pianists seem to demonstrate significantly stronger transmodal activity in
the motor part of the network associated with music listening than non-musicians. For
example, Baumann et al. recorded greater activity in the lateral dorsal premotor cortex
and the pre-supplementary motor cortex which suggested an increased motor
representation for piano sound in pianists. These results further suggest that an
intermodal transformation network of auditory and motor areas is subject to plasticity as
a result of intensive training.156
Mirror Neurons
The notion that actions might be intrinsically linked to perception was first
proposed in 1890 by William James who suggested that “every mental representation of a
movement awakens to some degree the actual movement which is its object.”157 The
implication is that observing, imagining, preparing, or in any way representing an action
Ibid.
154
Ibid.
155
Ibid., 65-78.
156
W. James, Principles of Physiology (New York: Holt, 1980), 293.

157
62
excites the motor program used to execute the same action.158 Developmental
psychologists have long accepted the idea of observational learning, or modeling, on the
belief that it is largely responsible for acquisition of language and social skills in
children. Modeling and motor skill acquisition has also been an important topic in
physical education.
According to Bandura, an “observer” obtains a cognitive representation of an
action from a model’s performance.159 Although the cognitive representation may be
incomplete because important dimensions of the movement such as pressure and
muscular tension are internal and not available to be observed,160 Adams has
demonstrated that the timing of the segments of a movement sequence can be learned by
observation.161 Observational learning, which incorporates viewing the model’s response
to the activity and the observer’s understanding or knowledge of results regarding the
activity, facilitates formation of a cognitive representation. Furthermore, Prinz has
demonstrated that when an observer sees a motor event that shares features with a similar
motor event in his or her own motor repertoire, he or she is primed to repeat it. The
See M. Jeannerod, “The Representing Brain. Neural Correlates of Motor

158
Intention and Imagery,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (1994): 187-245 and W. Prinz,
“Perception and Action Planning,” European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 9 (1997):
129-54.
159
A. Bandura, ed., Psychological Modeling (New York: Lieber-Atherton, 1971).
J. A. Adams, “Learning of Movement Sequences,” Psychological Bulletin 96

160
(1984): 3-28.
Idem, “Use of the Model’s Knowledge of Results to Increase the Observer’s

161
Performance,” Journal of Human Movement Studies 12 (1986): 89-98.

63
greater the similarity between the observed event and the motor event, the stronger the
priming is.162 Growing interest in the area has led to the discovery of mirror neurons and
a mirror neuron system.
Mirror neurons are a particular class of visuomotor neurons originally discovered
in area F5 of the monkey premotor cortex. These neurons discharge both when the
monkey performs a particular action and when it observes another individual performing
a similar action.163 It has been suggested that the functional role of mirror neurons is two-
fold. First, mirror neuron activity mediates imitation.164 Second, mirror neurons appear
to provide the basis for understanding an action.165 Kohler et al. have provided evidence
for the latter in demonstrating that F5 mirror neurons are able to recognize actions from
their sound.166 The researchers recorded F5 mirror neuron activity both while a monkey
was observing a noisy action, such as ripping a piece of paper, and while presenting the
same noise without observing the associated action. Results indicated that approximately
Prinz, “Perception and Action Planning,” 129-54.

162
See G. di Pellegrino et al., “Understanding Motor Events: A Neurophysiological

163
Study,” Experimental Brain Research 91 (1992): 176-80; V. L. Gallese et al., “Action

Recognition in the Premotor Cortex,” Brain 119 (1996): 593-609; and G. Rizzolatti et al.,
“Premotor Cortex and the Recognition of Motor Actions,” Cognitive Brain Research 3
(1996a): 131-41.
Jeannerod, “The Representing Brain,” 187-245.

164
G. Rizzolatti, L. Fogassi, and V. Gallese, “Neurophysiological Mechanisms

165
Underlying the Understanding and Imitation of Action,” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience

2(9) (2001): 661-70.
Evelyne Kohler et al., “Hearing Sounds, Understanding Actions: Action

166
Representation in Mirror Neurons,” Science 297(5582) (2002): 846-8.

64
fifteen percent of mirror neurons responsive to presentation of the action and sound also
responded to presentation of the sound by itself. The neurons that responded specifically
to the sounds of actions were called “audio-visual” mirror neurons.
Evidence for a mirror neuron system has recently been extended to humans with
studies indicating that mirror regions are activated when human subjects imitate or
imagine an action. Filimon et al. have used fMRI to compare human cortical activations
for executed, observed, and imagined reaching with the goal of identifying a mirror
neuron system that represents reaching and reaching-related behaviors.167 Significantly,
results suggest that such a mirror neuron system does exist and that it is both different
from and similar to the mirror neuron system underlying grasping movements and object
manipulation. Therefore, it appears that mirror neuron systems are specific to the type of
hand action performed. Results from the same research also demonstrated an overlap
between executed, observed, and imagined reaching activations in the human cortex,
specifically the dorsal premotor cortex as well as the superior parietal lobe and the
intraparietal sulcus. Furthermore, properties of the human mirror neuron system appear
to be neither wholly innate nor final as Catmur, Walsh, and Heyes have recently
demonstrated that these properties may be developed through sensorimotor learning.168
Flavia Filimon et al., “Human Cortical Representations for Reaching: Mirror

167
Neurons for Execution, Observation, and Imagery,” NeuroImage 37(4) (2007): 1315-28.
C. Catmur, V. Walsh, and C. Heyes, “Sensorimotor Learning Configures the

168
Human Mirror System,” Current Biology 17(17) (2007): 1527-31.

65
Discovery of audio-visual mirror neurons in monkeys gave rise to the hypothesis
that premotor areas are inherently involved, not only when observing actions, but also
when listening to action-related sound.169 Recent evidence indicates that humans possess
an echo-neuron system, a system that motorically “resonates” when an individual listens
to verbal material. For example, experiments by Fadiga et al.170 and Watkins et al.171
show activation of speech-related motor centers when an individual listens to verbal
stimuli. Studies by Aziz-Zadeh et al. suggest that, as a person hears and recognizes a
sound, the brain may also simulate the action.172 This might explain how the mirror
neuron system responds to actions and sounds which do not have verbal meaning and
which are well-controlled and newly acquired.
Several researchers have found audiomotor activation patterns within the core
regions of the frontoparietal mirror neuron circuit previously found in humans in a
variety of action-observations tasks.173 Some of these observations involved watching
Amir Lahav, Elliot Saltzman, and Gottfried Schlaug, “Action Representation of

169
Sound: Audiomotor Recognition Network While Listening to Newly Acquired Actions,”

The Journal of Neuroscience 27(2) (2007): 308-14.
L. Fadiga et al., “Speech Listening Specifically Modulates the Excitability of

170
Tongue Muscles: A TMS Study,” European Journal of Neuroscience 15 (2002): 399-

402.
Watkins, Strafella, and Paus, “Seeing and Hearing Speech,” 989-94.

171
L. Aziz-Zadeh et al., “Left Hemisphere Motor Facilitation in Response to

172
Manual Action Sounds,” European Journal of Neuroscience 19 (2004): 2609-12.
173
See J. Grèzes, et al., “Activations Related to ‘Mirror’ and ‘Canonical’ Neurones
in the Human Brain: An fMRI Study,” NeuroImage 18 (2003): 928-37; M. Iacoboni et
al., “Grasping the Intentions of Others with One’s Own Mirror Neuron System,” PLoS
66
chord progressions on the guitar174 or finger-playing movements on the piano.175 In
studies involving music performance, it is particularly interesting that the posterior
inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), including Broca’s area, was active only when subjects
listened to music they knew how to play. When subjects listened to music they had never
played, auditory activation was dominant since subjects were unable to match the music
with existing action representations. However, Lahav et al. have shown premotor activity
when subjects listened to untrained music comprised of the same notes as learned
music.176 The researchers hypothesized that premotor activity might reflect the ability of
subjects to link some of the notes they heard with corresponding fingers and piano keys.
Other evidence also suggests that mental simulations and operations of the mirror neuron
system might either be functionally related to one another or a form of one another;
further studies are needed to support this hypothesis, however. Furthermore, it has been
suggested that a cross-modal neural system responsible for formally orchestrating mirror
Biol 3(3) (2005): 529-35; and M. Lotze, “Differential Cerebral Activation During
Observation of Expressive Gestures and Motor Acts,” Neuropsychologia 44 (2006):
1787-95.
G. Buccino, F. Finkofski, and L. Riggio, “The Mirror Neuron System and

174
Action Recognition,” Brain and Language 89(2) (2004a): 362-9.
B. P. Haslinger et al., “Transmodal Sensorimotor Networks During Action

175
Observation in Professional Pianists,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17(2) (2005):

282-93.
176
Lahav, Saltzman, and Schlaug, “Action Representation of Sound,” 308-14.
67
neurons might exist in humans.177 A questions then arises as to whether or not mirror
neuron activity is triggered by mental representation of an action.178
Music and Mental Rehearsal
Mental rehearsal incorporates both committing a score to memory and the ability to
create an internalized representation of the sound. With the exception of the primary
motor and sensory areas, many of the other cortical regions that are normally active while
playing are also active during mental rehearsal.179 The effectiveness of mental practice in
improving aspects of the dynamics of movement, such as the accuracy of a movement
trajectory, has also been verified experimentally.180 While the gains achieved by those
undertaking mental rehearsal have not been as significant as those undertaking physical
practice, mental rehearsal is apparently better than no practice.181 Additionally, mental
rehearsal may help to mediate injuries related to overuse.
See Kohler et al., “Hearing Sounds, Understanding Actions,” 846-8 and C.

177
Keysers et al., “Audiovisual Mirror Neurons and Action Recognition,” Experimental

Brain Research 153(4) (2003): 628-36.
M. A. Umiltà et al., “I Know What You Are Doing. A Neurophysiological

178
Study,” Neuron 31(1) (2001): 155-65.
See F. J. Langheim et al., “Cortical Systems Associated with Covert Music

179
Rehearsal,” NeuroImage 16(4) (2002): 901-8; Lotze et al., “The Musician’s Brain,”
1817-29; and Meister et al., “Playing Piano in the Mind,” 219-28.
L. Yágüez et al., “A Mental Route to Motor Learning: Improving Trajectorial

180
Kinematics Through Imagery Training,” Behavioural Brain Research 90(1) (1998): 95-
106.
181
A. Gabrielsson, “The Performance of Music,” in The Psychology of Music, 2nd
ed., ed. D. Deutsch (San Diego: Academic Press, 1999), 501-602.
68
Motor Imagery
Motor imagery has been defined as the covert process of imagining movement of
one’s own body (-part) without actually moving that body (-part).182 Motor imagery is
significant since it leads to activation in motor areas of the brain.183 In addition to similar
brain activation, Pascual-Leone et al. demonstrated that motor imagery of finger
movements resulted in the same organizational changes as actual physical practice.184
The scientists studied the effects of mental and physical practice on the learning of a one-
handed, five-finger piano exercise and the modulation of the cortical motor areas
targeting muscles involved in the task. Over the course of five days, subjects rehearsed
the sequence either mentally or physically, and both groups showed progressive
improvement. Results showed that the size of the contralateral output map for the long
finger flexor and extensor muscles increased progressively each day as the subjects
practiced the task. The increases in size of the representations were equivalent in both
physical and mental training conditions, but the level of performance in the mental-
practice condition after 5 days was equivalent to that of the physical-practice condition
182
Sjoerd de Vries and Theo Mulder, “Motor Imagery and Stroke Rehabilitation: A
Critical Discussion,” Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 39 (2007): 5-13.
See Kristeva et al., “Activation of Cortical Areas in Music Execution and

183
Imagining: A High-resolution EEG Study,” NeuroImage 20(3) (2003): 1872-83; Lotze,

“The Musician’s Brain,” 1817-29; and Meister et al., “Playing Piano in the Mind,” 219-
28.
A. Pascual-Leone et al., “Modulation of Muscle Responses Evoked by

184
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation During the Acquisition of New Fine Motor Skills,”
69
after 3 days. However, after adding 1 physical training session at the end of a period of 5
days of mental practice, subjects reached the same level of performance as those who
were in the physical training group. The scientists interpreted the results as suggesting
that mental practice has a preparatory effect on the task which in turn increases the
efficiency of subsequent physical training.
Studies using positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) also show that the cortical regions involved in the execution
of a movement are active during motor imagery as well. Using fMRI, Lotze et al. studied
brain activation during executed and imagined movements of the right and left hand
using fMRI and found that the supplementary motor area (SMA), the premotor cortex
(PMC), and the primary motor area (M1) are significantly activated during both actual
and imagined movement.185 The SMA and PMC play a prominent role in the planning,
generation, and execution of more complex motor tasks.186
In addition, although the underlying mechanisms are not yet clear, there is
significant evidence supporting the hypothesis that overt movement, motor imagery, and
observation are essentially based on the same processes.187 Some of the evidence
supporting this is drawn from studies showing that the time to complete an imagined
M. Lotze et al., “Activation of Cortical and Cerebellar Motor Areas,” 491-501.

185
G. Abbruzzese, C. Trompetto, and M. Schieppati, “The Excitability of the

186
Human Motor Cortex Increases During Execution and Mental Imagination of Sequential
but not Repetitive Finger Movements,” Experimental Brain Research 111 (1996): 465-
72.
de Vries and Mulder, “Motor Imagery and Stroke Rehabilitation,” 5-13.

187
70
movement is similar to the time needed for actual execution of that movement, an
observation that extends to the field of music as well. Two studies displayed a great deal
of correlation in the times that it took string players to perform pieces and to imagine
performances of the pieces.188
Visual Imagery
Practice through use of visual imagery has been shown to benefit acquisition and
performance of motor skills.189 This phenomenon is supported by behavioral,
neuropsychological, and neuroimaging studies demonstrating that visual images and
perceived stimuli recruit the same temporal and occipital brain areas necessary for visual
perception.190 When utilizing visual imagery in practice, subjects experienced imagined
visual feedback similar to the visual feedback available during physical practice.191
Langheim et al., “Covert Music Rehearsal,” 901-8.

188
189
See M. U. Lejeune, C. Decker, and X. Sanchez, “Mental Rehearsal in Table
Tennis Performance,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 79(1) (1994): 627-41; W. G. Meacci
and D. L. Pastore, “The Effects of Occluded Vision and Imagery on Putting Golf Balls,”
Perceptual and Motor Skills 80(1): 179-86; D. W. Mendoza and H. Wichman, “‘Inner’
Dart: Effects of Mental Practice on Performance of Dart Throwing,” Perceptual and
Motor Skills 47 (1978): 1195-99; R. Noel, “The Effect of Visuo-Motor Behavioural
Rehearsal of Tennis Performance,” Journal of Sport Psychology 2 (1980): 221-6; Pascual-
Leone, “Modulation of Muscle Responses,” 1037-45; and G. Yue and K. J. Cole,
“Strength Increases From the Motor Program: Comparison of Training with Maximum
Voluntary and Imagined Muscle Contractions,” Journal of Neurophysiology 67 (1992):
1114-23.
190
See M. J. Farah, “The Neural Bases of Mental Imagery,” in The New Cognitive
Neurosciences, ed. M. S. Gazzaniga (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000), 965-74 and S.
M. Kosslyn and W. L. Thompson, “Shared Mechanisms in Visual Imagery and Visual
Perception: Insights from Cognitive Neuroscience,” in The New Cognitive
Neurosciences, ed. M. S. Gazzaniga (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000), 975-85.
191
Krigolson and Van Gyn, “‘Feedback; During Visual Imagery,” 24-32.
71
Although the benefits of visual imagery have been most significantly associated
with first-person imaging, substantial gain has also been reported as a result of third-
person observation. Considerable evidence suggests that observation of others’ actions
and the preparation of one’s own actions may lead to a common motor representation.192
Application of practice through use of imagery would therefore extend from lessons,
masterclasses, and concerts in which one observes another to the concert stage where
one’s preparation might incorporate imagery.
Musical Imagery
Aleman et al. define musical mental imagery as the “ability to ‘hear’ melodic
sound-sequences with the ‘mind’s ear’ in the absence of external stimulation.”193 While it
is a common phenomenon amongst musicians—conductors, composers, and performers
for example, it has only been relatively recently with the aid of imaging tools that musical
imagery could be substantiated scientifically. In large part due to the work of Schürman
et al. with magneto-encephalography,194 Halpern and Zatorre195 and Zatorre et al.196 with
M. Jeannerod, “The 25th Bartlett Lecture. To Act or Not to Act: Perspectives

192
on the Representation of Actions,” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52

(1999): 1-29.
A. Aleman et al., “Music Training and Mental Imagery Ability,”

193
Neuropsychologia 38 (2000): 1664-8.
See M. Schurmann et al., “Mind’s Ear in a Musician: Where and When in the
194
Brain,” NeuroImage 16 (2002): 434-40.
A. R. Halpern and R. J. Zatorre, “When that Tune Runs Through Your Head: A
195
PET Investigation of Auditory Imagery for Familiar Melodies,” Cerebral Cortex 9

(1999): 697-704.
72
positron emission tomography, and Halpern et al.,197 Kraemer et al.,198 and Yoo et al.199
with functional MRI, converging evidence has demonstrated that neural activity in the
auditory cortex can occur in the absence of sound and that the activity is likely mediated
by the experience of imagining music. An fMRI study conducted by Nakada, Fujii,
Suzuki, & Kwee200 and a magnetoencephalography (MEG) study by Schürmann, Raij,
Fujiki, and Hari201 also clearly show audiocortical activity while musical notation is
read.202 Furthermore, despite the fact that musicians are able to remember visually-
presented sequences of musical notes via musical imagery, nonmusicians are not able to
transform visual notation into musical images.203
R. J. Zatorre et al., “Hearing in the Mind’s Ear: A PET Investigation of Musical

196
Imagery and Perception,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 8 (1996): 29-46.
Halpern et al., “Behavioral and Neural Correlates of Perceived and Imagined

197
Musical Timbre,” Neuropsychologia 42(9) (2004): 1281-92.
D. J. M. Kraemer et al., “Musical Imagery: Sound of Silence Activates

198
Auditory Cortex,” Nature 434 (2005): 158.
S. S. Yoo, C. U. Lee, and B. G. Choi, “Human Brain Mapping of Auditory

199
Imagery: Event-Related Functional MRI Study,” Neuroreport 12(14) (2001): 3045-9.
T. Nakada et al., “‘Musical Brain’ Revealed by High-field (3Tesla) Functional

200
MRI,” NeuroReport 9 (1998): 3853-56.
201
Schurmann et al., “Mind’s Ear in a Musician,” 434-40.
J. A. Sloboda, review of Language, Music, and Mind, by Diana Raffman, Mind

202
& Language 9 (1994): 377-85.
203
See Virpi Kalakoski, “Effect of Level on Recall of Visually Presented Patterns of
Musical Notes,” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 48 (2007): 87-96; Warren Brodsky
et al., “Auditory Imagery from Musical Notation in Expert Musicians,” Perception &
Psychophysics 65(4) (2003): 6012-12; and M. Schürmann et al., “Mind’s Ear in a
73
Recently, interest has grown in areas related to mental practice, and several
individuals have shown the overall efficacy of mental practice in music performance.204
Recent studies have demonstrated that pianists’ mental practice with an auditory model
resulted in advantages over mental practice alone205 while it has also been demonstrated
that analytical score study often aided memorization of unfamiliar music.206 It has since
been suggested that analytical study might lead to auditory imagery or motor imagery.207
Several studies have indicated that listening to a performance is effective in learning
unfamiliar music.208 Highben and Palmer demonstrated that pianists with strong aural
Musician: Where and When in the Brain,” NeuroImage 16 (2002): 434-40.
D. D. Coffman, “Effects of Mental Practice, Physical Practice, and Knowledge

204
of Results in Piano Performance,” Journal of Research in Music Education 38 (1990):

187-96 and S. L. Ross, “The Effectiveness of Mental Practice in Improving the
Performance of College Trombonists,” Journal of Research in Music Education 33 (1985):
221-30.
See S. Lim and L. G. Lippman, “Mental Practice and Memorization of Piano

205
Music,” Journal of General Psychology 118 (1991): 21-30 and A. M. Theiler and L. G.
Lippman, “Effects of Mental Practice and Modeling on Guitar and Vocal Performance,”
Journal of General Psychology 122 (1995): 329-43.
G. Rubin-Rabson, “The Influence of Analytical Pre-Study in Memorizing Piano

206
Music,” Archives of Psychology 20 (1937): 3-53.
S. Lim and L. G. Lippman, “Mental Practice and Memorization of Piano

207
Music,” Journal of General Psychology 118 (1991): 21-30.
See R. K. Rosenthal, “The Relative Effects of Guided Model, Model Only,

208
Guided Only, and Practice Only on the Accuracy of Advanced Instrumentalists’ Musical
Performance, Accuracy,” Journal of Research in Music Education 32 (1984): 265-73 and
R. K. Rosenthal et al., “Effects of Different Practice Conditions on Advanced
Instrumentalists’ Performance Accuracy,” Journal of Research in Music Education 36
(1988): 250-7.
74
skills were least affected by the absence of auditory feedback during learning and suggest
that “good performance in the absence of feedback could be due to little or no reliance on
that type of feedback, or alternatively, to good imagery skills that allow performers to use
mental practice to ‘fill in’ for the missing feedback.”209 In suggesting the likelihood of
the latter, the scientists note a significant correlation between pianists’ aural skills
measures and their performance from memory following the absence of auditory
feedback during practice. Furthermore, this conclusion is consistent with earlier studies
demonstrating increased efficacy of mental practice with an auditory model.210
How does a musical image compare to the music itself? Although literature
concerning auditory imagery has not been as prevalent as literature concerning visual
imagery, similar conclusions have been reached in several cases. Because musical
images contain melodic and harmonic information and encode fairly precise information
about tempo and pitch, they apparently possess a sensory quality similar to the experience
of perceiving actual music.211 Furthermore, studies in which subjects demonstrate
recruitment of the secondary auditory cortex as a result of imagining tones in familiar and
Z. Highben and C. Palmer, “Effects of Auditory and Motor Mental Practice in

209
Memorized Piano Performance,” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education
159 (2004): 64.
See Lim and Lippman, “Mental Practice and Memorization of Piano Music,”
210
21-30; R. K. Rosenthal et al., “Effects of Different Practice Conditions,” 250-7; and

Theiler and Lippman, “Effects of Mental Practice and Modeling,” 329-43.
See T. L. Hubbard and K. Stoeckig, “Musical Imagery: Generation of Tones

211
and Chords,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 14

(1988): 656-67 and Idem, “The Representation of Pitch in Musical Imagery,” in Auditory
Imagery, ed. D. Reisberg (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992): 199-236.
75
unfamiliar melodies suggest that shared substrates exist for auditory perception and
imagery.212
Auditory images also seem to demonstrate perceptual properties in that they
influence perceptual processing of auditory stimuli.213 Farah and Smith used a signal
detection test to show that the intensity threshold for detecting a pure tone in noise was
lower when subjects formed an image of the target tone either before or during the
observation than when subjects formed an image of a different tone.214 The researchers
concluded that forming the mental image drew attention to the appropriate frequency and
therefore facilitated perception. Similar results have been obtained regarding perception
and the timing of events. Wright and Fitzgerald determined that forming an expectancy
of a target tone based on a cue facilitates the tone’s detection compared to unexpected
occurrences of the target tone.215 Furthermore, it is apparent that musical training affects
perception of auditory stimuli. Janata and Paroo observed significant correlations
212
See Zatorre et al., “Hearing in the Mind’s Ear,” 29-46; Halpern and Zatorre,
“When that Tune Runs Through Your Head,” 697-704; Kraemer et al., “Sound of
Silence,” 158; P. Janata, “Brain Electrical Activity Evoked by Mental Formation of
Auditory Expectations and Images,” Brain Topography 13 (2001a): 169-93; and Idem,
“Neurophysiological Measurements Underlying Auditory Image Formation in Music,” in
Musical Imagery, ed. R. I. Godoy and H. Jorgensen (Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets &
Zeitlinger), 27-41.
Petr Janata and Kaivon Paroo, “Acuity of Auditory Images in Pitch and Time,”
213
Perception & Psychophysics 68(5) (2006): 829-44.
M. J. Farah and A. F. Smith, “Perceptual Interference and Facilitation with

214
Auditory Imagery,” Perception & Psychophysics 33 (1983): 475-8.
B. Z. Wright and M. B. Fitzgerald, “The Time Course of Attention in a Simple

215
Auditory Detection Task,” Perception & Psychophysics 66 (2004): 508-16.

76
between the amount of musical training and image thresholds with regard to both
intonation and context membership tasks such that greater musical training resulted in
more finely tuned images.216
Imagery, Performance, and Brain Activity
With the exception of the primary motor cortex, it has been demonstrated that
essentially the same cortical regions are activated in imagining and performance
activities.217 It is particularly interesting therefore that Parsons et al. have demonstrated
that performing scales and J.S. Bach’s Italian Concerto in F Major (BWV 971) from
memory elicit different patterns of brain activation.218 Performance of scales and the
concerto activated many of the same areas of the brain, but distinct areas of the brain
were also active in each condition and can be linked to specific functions regarding
performance of the particular task. Furthermore, the scientists observed a significant
amount of deactivation throughout the brain, particularly during performance of the
Bach. While differences in attention may account for some of the differences in brain
activation, it may not be the only factor. Furthermore, the results of this research seem to
216
Janata and Paroo, “Acuity of Auditory Images,” 829-44.
See E. Gerardin et al., “Partially Overlapping Neural Networks for Real and
217
Imagined Hand Movements,” Cerebral Cortex 10 (2000): 1093-1104; M. Lotze et al.,

“Activation of Cortical and Cerebellar Motor Areas During Executed and Imagined Hand
Movements: An fMRI Study,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 11 (1999): 491-501;
and C. A. Porro et al., “Primary Motor and Sensory Cortex Activation During Motor
Performance and Motor Imagery: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study,”
Journal of Neuroscience 16 (1996) 7688-98.
Lawrence M. Parsons, et al., “The Brain Basis of Piano Performance,”

218

77
indicate that the human body is differentially involved in performing distinct musical
activities.
Attention
Many factors interact and contribute to the performance of a well-learned skill:
knowledge structures,219 memory capacities,220 problem-solving abilities,221 individual
differences,222 and attentional mechanisms supporting skill execution.223 Attentional
mechanisms incorporate “the manner in which experienced performers allocate attention
to skill processes and procedures as actual skill execution unfolds, as well as differences
M. T. Chi, P. J. Feltovich, and R. Glaser, “Categorization and Representation of

219
Physics Problems by Experts and Novices,” Cognitive Science 5 (1981): 121-52.
See W. G. Chase and H. A. Simon, “Perception in Chess,” Cognitive Psychology

220
4 (1973): 55-81; A. de Groot, Thought and Choice in Chess (The Hague, the
Netherlands: Mouton, 1978); and J. L. Starkes, and J. Deakin, “Perception in Sport: A
Cognitive Approach to Skilled Performance,” in Cognitive Sport Psychology, eds. W. F.
Straub & J. M. Williams (Lansing, MI: Sport Science Associates, 1984), 115-28.
See Priest and Lindsay, “New Light on Novice-Expert Differences,” 389-405

221
and Tenenbaum and Bar-Eli, “Decision-Making in Sport,” 171-92.
See P. L. Ackerman, “Individual Differences in Skill Learning: An Integration of

222
Psychometric and Information Processing Perspectives,” Psychological Bulletin 102

(1987): 3-27; P. L. Ackerman and A. T. Cianciolo, “Cognitive, Perceptual-Speed, and
Psychomotor Determinants of Individual Differences During Skill Acquisition,” Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Applied 6 (2000): 259-90; and R. Kanfer and P. L.
Ackerman, “Motivation and Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative/Aptitude—Treatment
Interaction Approach to Skill Acquisition,” Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (1989):
657-90.
Beilock et al., “When Paying Attention Becomes Counterproductive,” 6-16.

223
78
in the attentional requirements of low- and high-level performances.”224 Knowledge of
attentional mechanisms in skill acquisition has the potential to aid the development of the
most optimal techniques for skill acquisition225 and to help explicate suboptimal
performances of well-learned skills.226
The role of attention in skill acquisition and execution seems to be dependent
upon the three general stages of learning characterized by both qualitative differences in
cognitive structures supporting performance and differences in performance. Research
has suggested that early in learning, skill execution is supported by a set of non-
integrated control structures held in working memory and attended to in a step-by-step
fashion.227 As a result of this close attentional monitoring to skill execution, attention
Ibid., 6.
224
225
See R. N. Singer, R. Lidor, and J. H. Cauraugh, “To Be Aware or Not Aware?
What to Think About While Learning and Performing a Motor Skill,” The Sport
Psychologist 7 (1993): 19-30; G. Wulf, M. Hob, and W. Prinz, “Instructions for Motor
Learning: Differential Effects of Internal Versus External Focus of Attention,” Journal of
Motor Behavior 30 (1998): 169-79; and G. Wulf et al., “Attentional Focus in Complex
Skill Learning,” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 71 (2000): 229-39.
226
See R. F. Baumeister, “Choking Under Pressure: Self-Consciousness and
Paradoxical Effects of Incentives on Skillful Performance,” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 46 (1984): 610-20; S. L. Beilock and T. H. Carr, “On the Fragility of
Skilled Performance: What Governs Choking Under Pressure?” Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General 130 (2001): 701-25; and B. Lewis and D. Linder, “Thinking About
Choking? Attentional Processes and Paradoxical Performance,” Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin 23 (1997): 937-44.
See J. R. Anderson, The Architecture of Cognition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard

227
University Press, 1983); Idem, Rules of Mind (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1993); Fitts and
Posner, Human Performance; and R. W. Proctor and A. Dutta, Skill Acquisition and
Human Performance (Thousand oaks, CA: Sage, 1995).
79
devoted to controlling task performance is largely unavailable for either interpretation or
processing of non-task related stimuli. Therefore, in the early stages of the learning
process, self-regulation may actually disrupt execution of a particular skill by recruiting
attentional resources required for executing the task.228 With practice, procedural
knowledge specific to the execution of the task develops and improves real-time skill
execution leading to automated performance.229 This procedural knowledge operates
largely outside of working memory and does not require constant control.230 As a result,
attentional mechanisms may become available for processing stimuli that are not task-
related. However, evidence suggests that performance of a second ancillary task may
prevent learning of the principal task231 and diminish performance in the principal task.232
F. H. Kanfer and M. K. Stevenson, “The Effects of Self-Regulation on

228
Concurrent Cognitive Processing,” Cognitive Therapy and Research 6 (1985): 667-84.
A. D. Fisk and W. Schneider, “Memory as a Function of Attention, Level of

229
Processing, and Automatization,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,

Memory, and Cognition 10 (1984): 181-97.
See Anderson, The Architecture of Cognition; Fitts and Posner, Human

230
Performance; S. W. Keele and J. J. Summers, “The Structure of Motor Programs,” in

Motor Control: Issues and Trends, ed. G.E. Stelmach (New York: Academic Press,
1976); G. A. Kimble and L. C. Perlmuter, “The Problem of Volition,” Psychological
Review 77 (1970): 361-84; and E. Langer, and G. Imber, “When Practice Makes
Imperfect: Debilitating Effects of Overlearning,” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 37 (1979): 2014-24.
M. J. Nissen and P. Bullemer, “Attentional Requirements of Learning: Evidence

231
from Performance Measures,” Cognitive Psychology 19 (1987): 1-32.
R. Dell’Aqua and P. Jolicoeur, “Visual Encoding of Patterns is Subject to Dual-

232
Task Interference,” Memory & Cognition 28(2) (2000): 184-91.

80
Other studies involving musicians,233 hockey players,234 soccer players,235 and golfers236
have shown that experienced performers are better able to deal with conditions involving
dual-task environments than novices which suggests that constant online attentional
control may not be necessary once a high level of performance has been achieved. In
fact, once skills have been well-learned, attention devoted to the step-by-step components
of skill may be detrimental to the execution of the skill.237
Beilock et al., “Attention Becomes Counterproductive,” 6-16.

233
J. Leavitt, “Cognitive Demands of Skating and Stick Handling in Ice Hockey,”

234
Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences 4 (1979): 46-55.
M. D. Smith and C. J. Chamberlin, “Effect of Adding Cognitively Demanding

235
Tasks on Soccer Skill Performance,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 75 (1992): 955-61.
See S. L. Beilock, S. A. Wierenga, and T. H. Carr, “Expertise, Attention, and

236
Memory in Sensorimotor Skill Execution: Impact of Novel Task Constraints on Dual-

Task Performance and Episodic Memory,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 55(4) (2002): 1211-40 and Idem, “Memory and Expertise: What Do
Experienced Athletes Remember?” in Expert Performance in Sports: Advances in
Research on Sport Expertise, ed. Janet L. Starkes and K. Anders Ericsson (Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics, 2003), 295-320.
237
See Baumeister, “Choking Under Pressure,” 610-20; S. L. Beilock and T. H.
Carr, “Fragility of Skilled Performance,” 701-25; Kimble and Perlmuter, “The Problem of
Volition,” 361-84; Langer and Imber, “When Practice Makes Imperfect,” 2014-24; and
Lewis and Linder, “Thinking About Choking?” 937-44.
81
Masters and colleagues238 proposed that attention to high-level skills results in their
‘breakdown,’ in which the compiled real-time control structure of a skill is broken
down into a sequence of smaller, separate, independent units—similar to how
performance may have been organized early in learning. Once broken down, each unit
must be activated and run separately, which slows performance and, at each transition
between units, creates an opportunity for error that was not present in the ‘chunked’
control structure.239
Researchers have suggested that attention to step-by-step components of a well-
learned skill may be prompted by pressure to perform at a high level which in turn may
contribute to suboptimal performance of well-learned skills.240 It is apparent that novel
and well-learned tasks require different levels of attentional resources for successful
execution.
If [skill-focused attention is] applied in other circumstances, such as practice

situations, in which performers are consciously attempting to dismantle their skill and
modify certain parts in accord with data collected by self-regulatory activities such as
those mentioned above, skill-focused attention may actually be helpful. That is, when
the goal is not to maximize real-time performance but instead to explicitly alter or
change performance processes to achieve a different outcome, skill-focused attention
may be beneficial. In this manner, skill-focused attention may become embedded in
the metacognitive activities of self-regulation.241
238
See R. S. W. Masters, “Knowledge, Knerves, and Know-How: The Role of
Explicit Versus Implicit Knowledge in the Breakdown of a Complex Motor Skill Under
Pressure,” British Journal of Psychology 83 (1992): 343-58; R. S. W. Masters et al.,
“‘Reinvestment:’ A Dimension of Personality Implicated in Skill Breakdown Under
Pressure,” Personality & Individual Differences 14 (1993): 655-66.
Beilock et al., “Attention Becomes Counterproductive,” 8.

239
240
See Baumeister, “Choking Under Pressure,” 610-20; Beilock and Carr, “Fragility
of Skilled Performance,” 701-25 and Lewis and Linder, “Thinking About Choking?” 937-
44.
Beilock et al., “Attention Becomes Counterproductive,” 15.

241
82
The importance of attentional mechanisms and their training or practice implications are
obvious with compulsory attention to step-by-step components in early stages shifting to
self-regulation in later stages of skill acquisition.
Motor Learning and the Human Hand
Handedness and Facility of the Non-Dominant Hand
Over the course of history, the number of left-handers in the general population
has been estimated to be between approximately one and twenty-nine percent depending
upon the testing method.242 On the basis of performance studies, Hardyck and
Petrinovich have estimated the number to be between eight and ten percent.243 Several
studies have been conducted to determine whether or not various groups might differ in
measures of handedness from the general population. A study conducted by Oldfield244
found no differences in handedness between musicians and nonmusicians while other
studies have found left and mixed-handers to be overrepresented in musician
populations.245 A particularly interesting study by Byrne examined handedness of music
C. Hardyck and L. F. Petrinovich, “Left-Handedness,” Psychological Bulletin 84

242
(1977): 391.
Ibid.
243
R. C. Oldfield, “Handedness in Musicians,” British Journal of Psychology 60

244
(1969): 91-9.
See B. Byrne, “Handedness and Musical Ability,” British Journal of Psychology

245
65 (1974): 279-81; K. O. Göttestam, “Left-Handedness Among Students of Architecture

and Music,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 70 (1990): 1323-27; and M. Hassler and N.
Birbaumer, “Handedness, Musical Abilities, and Dihaptic and Dichotic Performance in
Adolescents: A Longitudinal Study,” Developmental Neuropsychology 4 (1988): 129-45.
83
students and found that the proportion of mixed-handedness was greater among
instrumentalists but not singers.246 Results of research by Christman also demonstrated
that populations of musicians such as string players who, according to his definition, play
instruments requiring greater bimanual coordination than others, display greater
proportion of left- and/or mixed-handedness.247 However, recent studies have shown that
the prevalence of left- or mixed-handedness in musicians is only four to six percent
higher than in nonmusicians.248 What remains more difficult to assess is whether the
observed differences amongst populations occur as musicians self-select with regard to
their chosen profession or whether developing skills necessary to play particular
instruments results in weakening the degree of one’s handedness.
Attempts to address this issue often involve studying the long-term effects of
practice on hand skill asymmetry. Research by Jäncke, Schlaug, and Steinmetz found
that right-handed musicians demonstrated a reduced degree of hand skill asymmetry in
comparison to right-handed nonmusicians.249 The reduced asymmetry demonstrated by
Byrne, “Handedness and Musical Ability,” 279-81.

246
Stephen Christman, “Handedness in Musicians: Bimanual Constraints on

247
Performance,” Brain and Cognition 22 (1993): 266-72.
248
See J. P. Aggleton, R. W. Kentridge, and J. M. M. Good, “Handedness and
Musical Ability: A Study of Professional Orchestral Players, Composers, and Choir
Members,” Psychology of Music 22 (1994): 148-56; A. N. Gilbert and C. J. Wysocki,
“Hand Preference and Age in the United States,” Neuropsychologia 30 (1992): 601-8;
and I. B. Perelle and L. Ehrman, “An International Study of Human Handedness: The
Data,” Behavior Genetics 24 (1994): 217-28.
Lutz Jäncke, Gottfried Schlaug, and Helmuth Steinmetz, “Hand Skill

249
Asymmetry in Professional Musicians,” Brain and Cognition 34 (1997): 424-32.

84
musicians was thought to be due to gains in skill of the non-dominant hand. Within
musician populations, keyboardists performed better than string players in a finger
tapping task, but better performance was not linked to performance asymmetry as the
level of asymmetry was similar in both groups. Furthermore, results indicated that hand
skill asymmetry was related to the age at musicians began their training with less
asymmetry associated with earlier training.
Bi-manual Coordination
Many daily activities, such as tying one’s shoes or pouring a glass of milk, for
example, require coordinated bimanual movements. The motion of the limbs is
coordinated with regard to each task and displays a great amount of temporal and spatial
diversity between tasks. Numerous activities, such as walking, riding bike, or swimming,
are cyclical and involve synchronized or alternated movement of muscle pairs, but other
tasks, such as tying shoelaces, opening a bottle, or playing a musical instrument, require
alternated movement of limb pairs. Interestingly enough, principles of interlimb
coordination cannot be deduced from those regarding unimanual movements.
Research indicates that biological systems often demonstrate synchronization. 250
Indeed, there is a basic tendency of limbs to operate in synchrony which results in
See S. L. Bressler and J. A. S. Kelso, “Cortical Coordination Dynamics and

250
Cognition,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (2001): 26-36; J. A. S. Kelso, Dynamic

Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior (Cambridge, Massachusetts:
MIT Press, 1995); and F. Varela et al., “The Brainweb: Phase Synchronization and
Large-Scale Integration,” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 2 (2001): 229-39.
85
coordination constraints due to temporal and spatial parameters of movement.251 Even
amputees with phantom limbs maintain a tendency toward bimanual coupling.252 Many
activities, such as playing the piano, require that this synchronization be overcome.
Modes of Interlimb Coordination
Despite the fact that other modes exist, it is generally agreed that quadrupedal
animals and humans display a basic tendency toward either in-phase or anti-phase
coordination of the limbs with a prevalent one-to-one relationship in the frequency of
movements.253 In-phase coordination of the index fingers, for example, occurs when
similar muscles in the two fingers are active and the fingers mirror one another. Anti-
phase coordination occurs when nonhomologous muscles are active, when the index
fingers point in the same direction, for example. Research regarding cyclical bimanual
251
See E. A. Franz, “Spatial Coupling in the Coordination of Complex Actions,”
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A50 (1997): 684–704; J. A. S. Kelso, D.
L. Southard, and D. Goodman, “On the Coordination of Two-Handed Movements,”
Journal of Experimental. Psychology 5 (1979): 229–38; Idem, “On the Nature of Human
Interlimb Coordination,” Science 203 (1979): 1029–31; R. G. Marteniuk, C. L.
MacKenzie, and D. M. Baba, “Bimanual Movement Control: Information Processing
and Interaction Effects,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A36(2)
(1984): 335-65; D. E. Sherwood, “Distance and Location Assimilation Effects in Rapid
Bimanual Movement,” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 62 (1991): 302-8;
Idem, “Hand Preference, Practice Order, and Spatial Assimilations in Rapid Bimanual
Movement,” Journal of Motor Behavior 26 (1994): 123-34; S. P. Swinnen et al.,
“Control of Bilateral Asymmetrical Movements,” Experimental Brain Research 85
(1991): 163-73; and C. B. Walter et al., “Systematic Error in the Hierarchical
Organization of Physical Action,” Cognitive Science 25 (2001): 393-422.
E. A. Franz and V. S. Ramachandran, “Bimanual Coupling in Amputees with

252
Phantom Limbs,” Nature Neuroscience 1(6) (1998): 443-4.
T. Wannier et al., “Arm to Leg Coordination in Humans During Walking,

253
Creeping and Swimming,” Experimental Brain Research 14 (2001): 375-9.

86
movements in humans has demonstrated that, not only is the in-phase mode more
accurate and stable,254 but it also requires less attention than the anti-phase mode.255 In
order to understand basic principles of interlimb coordination, scientists have generally
attempted to identify the limitations of the central nervous system by studying different
movements performed simultaneously. Swinnen indicated that “archaic response
tendencies or coordination modes that the system settles into when stressed might also
reflect what most easily potentiated pathways of neural wiring are.”256
Observed limitations involve asymmetry between the hands and spatial and
temporal features of movement. For example Ibbotson and Morton demonstrated that
when right-handed individuals tap in synchrony with a metronome while simultaneously
tapping as quickly as possible with the other hand, performance is better when the right
254
See Kelso, Dynamic Patterns; R. G. Carson, “The Dynamics of Isometric
Bimanual Coordination,” Experimental Brain Research 105 (1995): 465–76; J. A. S.
Kelso, “Phase Transitions and Critical Behavior in Human Bimanual Coordination,”
American Journal of Physiology 246 (1984): R1000–R1004; A. Semjen, J. J. Summers,
and D. Cattaert, “Hand Coordination in Bimanual Circle Drawing,” Journal of
Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance 21 (1995): 1139–57; S.
P. Swinnen, and K. Jardin, “Egocentric and Allocentric Constraints in the Expression of
Patterns of Interlimb Coordination,” Journal of Cognitive. Neuroscience 9 (1997): 348–
77; S. P. Swinnen et al., “Exploring Interlimb Constraints During Bimanual Graphic
Performance: Effects of Muscle Grouping and Direction,” Behavioural Brain Research
90 (1998): 79–87; and J. Yamanishi, M. Kawato, and R. Suzuki, “Two Coupled
Oscillators as a Model for the Coordinated Finger Tapping by Both Hands,” Biological
Cybernetics 37 (1980): 219–25.
255
J. J. Temprado et al., “Attentional Load Associated with Performing and
Stabilizing Preferred Bimanual Patterns,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human
Perception and Performance 25 (1999): 1579–94.
S. P. Swinnen, “Intermanual Coordination: From Behavioural Principles to

256
Neural-Network Interactions,” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 3 (2002): 353.

87
hand performs the faster-paced tapping.257 Spatial constraints are observed in drawing
lines of different amplitudes as there is a tendency for the amplitudes of the lines to
become similar.258 Subjects in whom the corpus callosum has been severed have less
difficulty in producing simultaneous movements with unique directional requirements
than normal subjects.259 Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, in finger tapping, these subjects
demonstrate temporal coupling during movements such as finger tapping;260 however,
when tasks become more complicated and require coordination beyond basic in-phase
coupling, they do not perform as well.261
257
N. R. Ibbotson, and J. Morton, “Rhythm and Dominance,” Cognition 9 (1981):
125-38.
See Marteniuk, MacKenzie, and Baba, “Bimanual Movement Control,” 335-65;

258
Sherwood, “Distance and Location,” 302-8; Idem, “Rapid Bimanual Movement,” 123-34;
H. Heuer et al., “The Time-Course of Cross-Talk During the Simultaneous Specification
of Bimanual Movement Amplitudes,” Experimental Brain Research 118 (1998): 381-92;
and W. Spijkers and H. Heuer, “Structural Constraints on the Performance of
Symmetrical Bimanual Movements with Different Amplitudes,” Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology A48 (1995): 716-40.
259
See J. C. Eliassen, K. Baynes, and M. S. Gazzaniga, “Direction Information
Coordinated Via the Posterior Third of the Corpus Callosum During Bimanual
Movements,” Experimental Brain Research 128 (1999): 573-77; Idem, “Anterior and
Posterior Callosal Contributions to Simultaneous Bimanual Movements of the Hands and
Fingers,” Brain 123 (2000): 2501-11; and E. A. Franz et al., “Dissociation of Spatial and
Temporal Coupling in the Bimanual Movements of Callosotomy Patients,” Psychological
Science 7 (1996): 306-10.
B. Tuller and J. A. S. Kelso, “Environmentally-Specified Patterns of Movement

260
Coordination in Normal and Split-Brain Subjects,” Experimental Brain Research 75

(1989): 306-16.
See B. Preilowski, “Possible Contribution of the Anterior Forebrain

261
Sommissures to Bimanual Motor Coordination,” Neuropsychologia 10 (1972): 267-77

and Idem, “Bilateral Motor Interaction: Perceptual-Motor Performance of Partial and
88
Finger Tapping and Polyrhythms
Studies involving finger tapping have often been used to study bimanual
coordination. In these studies, a distinction is often made between simple rhythms, those
in which one frequency is an integer multiple of another, and polyrhythms, such as 3:2 or
5:4. In general, research has shown that polyrhythms are more difficult to produce and
are produced with greater variability than simple rhythms.262 Early studies involving
polyrhythms required participants to play two to six notes per second and showed that, at
those speeds, participants were able to keep up with the beat263 or even anticipate the
beat.264 However, it appears that higher-order ratios comprised of large numerators and
denominators are less stable than lower-order ratios. “One reason why musicians must
Complete ‘Split-Brain’ Patients,” in Cerebral Localization, ed. K. J. Zulch, O.

Creutzfeld, and G. C. Galbraith (New York: Springer, 1975), 115-32.
262
See Deutsch, “Sequences in Parallel,” 331-37; R. J. Jagacinski et al., “Test of
Parallel Versus Integrated Structure in Polyrhythmic Tapping,” Journal of Motor
Behavior 20 (1988): 416-42; S. Klapp et al., “On Marching to Two Different Drummers:
Perceptual Aspects of the Difficulties,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human
Perception and Performance 11 (1985): 814-27; C. E. Peper, P. J. Beek, and P. C. W.
van Wieringen, “Multifrequency Coordination in Bimanual Tapping: Asymmetrical
Coupling and Signs of Supercriticality,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human
Perception and Performance 19 (1993): 416-28; and P. J. Treffner and M. T. Turvey,
“Resonance Constraints on Rhythmic Movements,” Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance 19(6) (1993): 1221-37.
See J. Pressing, J. Summers, and J. Magill, “Cognitive Multiplicity in

263
Polyrhythmic Pattern Performance,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human

Perception and Performance 22(5) (1996): 1127-48 and J. Summers et al., “Productions
of Polyrhythms,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance 19(2) (1993): 416-28.
R. J. Jagacinski et al., “Tests of Parallel Versus Integrated Structure in

264
Polyrhythmic Tapping,” Journal of Motor Behavior 20(4) (1988): 416-42.

89
practice so-called difficult rhythms stems from this differential stability.”265 As the
frequency of tapping is increased, a transition from higher-order ratios to lower-order
ratios is observed.266 Although two studies have obtained results contrary to the
following,267 Peters and Schwartz268 and Klapp et al.269 have demonstrated that the hands
are not independent of one another even at intermediate speeds. Furthermore,
performance of multi-frequency tasks is often associated with an asymmetrical coupling
effect in which the fast hand has a larger influence on the slow hand than vice versa.270
Nevertheless, musically trained subjects are more accurate in performance of
P. G. Zanone and J. A. S. Kelso, “Evolution of Behavioral Attractors With

265
Learning: Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions,” Journal of Experimental Psychology:

Human Perception and Performance 18(2) (1992): 418.
See Ibid. and C. E. Peper, P. J. Beek, and P. C. W. van Wieringen, “Bifurcation

266
in Polyrhythmic Tapping: In Search of Farey Principles,” in Tutorials in Motor

Neuroscience, ed. G.E. Stelmach (New York: Kluwer, 1991): 413-31.
See R. T. Krampe, et al., “The Fast and Slow of Skilled Bimanual Rhythm
267
Production: Parallel Versus Integrated Timing,” Journal of Experimental Psychology:

Human Perception and Performance 26(1) (2000): 206-33 and L. H. Shaffer,
“Performances of Chopin, Bach and Bartok: Studies in Motor Programming,” Cognitive
Psychology 13 (1981): 326-76.
268
Peters and Schwartz, “Coordination of the Two Hands,” 215-24.
S. T. Klapp, J. M. Nelson, and R. J. Jagacinski, “Can People Tap Concurrent

269
Bimanual Rhythms Independently?” Journal of Motor Behavior 30(4) (1998): 301-22.

270
See Ibid.; Summers et al., “Productions of Polyrhythms,” 416-28; W. D.
Byblow et al., “Performance Asymmetries and Coupling Dynamics in the Acquisition of
Multifrequency Bimanual Coordination,” Psychological Research 61 (1998): 56-70; M.
Peters, “Constraints in the Coordination of Bimanual Movements and Their Expression in
Skilled and Unskilled Subjects,” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A37
(1985): 171-96; and Peters and Schwartz, “Coordination of the Two Hands,” 215-224.
90
polyrhythms than non-musicians271 which suggests the skill is amenable to practice.
Researchers have demonstrated that the ability to play the correct rhythm apparently
varies with one’s skill level,272 focus of attention,273 and the complexity of the rhythm.
Subsequent research has focused on the stability of the performance of polyrhythms and
has attempted to resolve such as issues as what happens when motor control breaks
down.274
Bi-manual Transfer
Different kinds of transfer of learning are known to occur after the acquisition of a
motor task, ranging from transfer of relational to specific parameters of control.275 One
aspect that has received significant attention since the early twentieth century is bilateral
transfer. Early studies of bilateral transfer often used tasks like handwriting, drawing,
and maze learning.276 Criticism of this early body of work centered around the fact that,
271
Summers et al. “Productions of Polyrhythms,” 416-28.
272
Idem.
273
Pressing, Summers, and Magill, “Cognitive Multiplicity,” 1127-48.
274
Bogacz, “Performance of Polyrhythms,” 21-34.
D. E. Young and R. A. Schmidt, “Transfer of Movement Control in Motor Skill

275
Learning,” in Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Applications, ed. S. M.

Cornier and J. D. Hagman (San Diego, Academic Press, 1987), 47-79.
276
See T. W. Cook, “Studies in Cross Education: III. Kinesthetic Learning of an
Irregular Pattern,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 17 (1934): 749-62; E. Weig,
“Bilateral Transfer in the Motor Learning of Young Children and Adults,” Child
Development 3 (1932): 247-67; and R. B. Ammons, C. H. Ammons, and R. L. Morgan,
“Transfer of Skill and Decremental Factors Along the Speed Dimensions in Rotary
Pursuit,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 6 (1956): 43.
91
in general, the motor component of the tasks was not particularly demanding. Critics
therefore suggested that any observed transfer of learning could largely be attributed to
subjects’ acquisition of a cognitive representation of the structure of the task that could
then be transferred to the other hand in order to reproduce the skill.
More recent contributions to the literature provide additional support277 and some
limitations for bilateral effects.278 More complicated tasks and those requiring greater
motor skill have since provided some insight. For example, in a study by Shapiro,
subjects learned a complex wrist-rotation task in which they were required to move to
seven ordered target positions in a particular amount of time.279 Over the course of five
days, subjects practiced the task with their right hand and received feedback from a
computer screen after each trial. Results over the five days changed dramatically as a
result of practice. On the fifth day, the subjects were unexpectedly asked to perform the
same task but with the left hand. Results indicated that the left- and right-hand
movements were nearly identical therefore demonstrating a high degree of transfer from
the right to the left hand. These results were particularly interesting since the same
See P. Dunham, “Effect of Bilateral Transfer on Coincidence/Anticipation

277
Performance,” Research Quarterly 48 (1977): 51-5; S. L. Puretz, “Bilateral Transfer:

The Effects of Practice on the Transfer of Complex Dance Movement Patterns,”
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 54 (1983): 48-54; and K. Tsuji and Y. Ide,
“Development of Bilateral Transfer Skills in the Mirror Tracing,” Japanese
Psychological Research 16 (1974): 171-8.
R. E. Hicks, J. M. Frank, and M. Kinsbourne, “The Locus of Bimanual Skill

278
Transfer,” The Journal of General Psychology 107 (1982): 277-81.
D. C. Shapiro, “Bilateral Transfer of a Motor Program.” Paper presented at the

279
AAHPER annual meeting, March, 1977.

92
direction of movement was required of each limb therefore employing non-homologous
muscle groupings. Young and Schmidt interpret Shapiro’s results as suggesting “a
relatively abstract program structure that can employ various limb systems in producing a
response.”280 Previous studies by Bray,281 Raibert,282 and Merton283 support this view.
Bray demonstrated transfer effects of mirror-tracing performance from the hand to the
foot while Raibert’s research showed similarities in movement patterns when writing
with the dominant hand, the dominant arm, the nondominant hand, with the pen between
his teeth, and with the pen taped to his foot. Likewise, Merton demonstrated the
similarities between signatures of different sizes despite the difference in muscles
involved.
Completely specific acquisition of motor skills or perfect transfer of learning,
however, is rarely observed.284 Several studies have demonstrated that the subdominant
hand benefits more from dominant hand training than does the dominant hand from
280
Young and Schmidt, “Transfer of Movement Control,” 62.
C. W. Bray, “Transfer of Learning,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 11

281
(1928): 443-67.
M. H. Raibert, “Motor Control and Learning by the State-Space Model,” (Ph.D.

282
diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977).
P. A. Merton, “How We Control the Contraction of Our Muscles,” Scientific

283
American 226 (1972): 30-7.
L. A. Teixeira, “Timing and Force Components in Bilateral Transfer of

284
Learning,” Brain and Cognition 44 (2000): 455.

93
subdominant hand training.285 To assess the effects of practice on performance with
regard to unimanual and bimanual movements, Schulze, et al.286 used a variant of the
pegboard task, a task widely used in neuropsychology for the examination of complex
uni- and bimanual motor functions.287 Results showed strong practice effects for each
hand and for each training condition. Of particular interest were the effects for the
untrained hands.
After training, movement times were considerably reduced for all hands and for all
training conditions. 2. Practice effects were found for the hand trained and also for the
untrained hand. 3. There was not a great difference in the size of the practice effects
for the right hand after left hand training or for the left hand after right hand training.
4. Task difficulty had no clear influence on the practice effect. 5. Bimanual
movements not only profit from bimanual training but also from unimanual training
and conversely unimanual movements benefit from bimanual training. However,
unimanual training resulted in strong practice effects for the bimanual tasks. However,
the practice effect of unimanual training on bimanual movements was smaller than the
practice effect of bimanual training on bimanual movements.288
285
See U. Halsband, “Left Hemisphere Preponderance in Trajectorial Learning,”
NeuroReport 3 (1992): 397-400; J. L. Laszlo, R. A. Baguley, and P. J. Bairstow,
“Bilateral Transfer in Tapping Skill in the Absence of Peripheral Information,” Journal
of Motor Behavior 2 (1970): 261-71; R. Milisen and C. V. Riper., “Differential Transfer
of Training in a Rotary Activity,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 24 (1939): 640-6;
and S. E. Parlow and M. Kinsbourne, “Asymmetrical Transfer of Training Between
Hands: Implications for Interhemispheric Communication in Normal Brain,” Brain and
Cognition 11 (1989): 98-113.
K. Schulze, E. Lüders, and L. Jäncke, “Intermanual Transfer in a Simple Motor

286
Task,” Cortex 38 (2002): 805-15.
See M. Annett, Left, Right, Hand and Brain: The Right Shift Theory (London:
287
Erlbaum, 1985) and A. L. Doyen and M. Carlier, “Measuring Handedness: A Validation

Study of Bishop’s Reading Card Test,” Laterality 7 (2002): 115-30.
Schulze, Lüders, and Jäncke, “Intermanual Transfer,” 805.

288
94
Although mechanisms underlying transfer of learning have yet to have been
identified, the body of evidence supporting bilateral transfer is significant. Most
importantly, the mounting body of research enhances our ability to optimize training
regiments, teaching methodologies, and ultimately performance.
Musical Skills and Acquisition of New Coordination Patterns
Numerous factors including hand dominance289, physiological functionality,290 and
training and attention291 have been shown to influence coordination patterns. The effect
of attention was studied by Peters and Schwartz who required subjects to count aloud one
of the streams in a 3:2 polyrhythm.292 Results indicated that both musically skilled and
unskilled subjects performed better when attending to the faster of the two streams.
However, a study by Pressing et al. demonstrated that expert percussionists were able to
perform a 4:3 polyrhythm with a high degree of accuracy regardless of which hand
P. J. Treffner and M. T. Turvey, “Handedness and the Asymmetric Dynamics

289
of Bimanual Rhythmic Coordination,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human

Perception and Performance 23(1) (1997): 1-15.
See P. J. Beek, C. E. Peper, and A. Daffertshofer, “Modeling Rhythmic

290
Interlimb Coordination: Beyond the Kahen-Kelso-Bunz Model,” Brain and Cognition 48

(2002): 149-65 and C. L. Peper, et al., “Explanatory Limitations of the HKB Model:
Incentives for a Two-Tiered Model of Rhythmic Interlimb Coordination,” Human
Movement Science 23 (2004): 673-97.
See Zanone and Kelso, “Evolution of Behavioral Attractors with Learning,” 403-
291
21; Klapp, Nelson, and Jagacinski, “Can People Tap,” 301-22; and J. Temprado et al.,
“Attentional Demands Reflect Learning-Induced Alterations of Bimanual Coordination
Dynamics,” European Journal of Neuroscience 16 (2002): 1390-4.
292
Peters and Schwartz, “Coordination of the Two Hands,” 215-24.
95
performed which stream or which stream was the focus of attention.293 Summers
suggested that the percussionists’ performance was perhaps a result of their training
which requires the learning of a given polyrhythm in three ways: one stream as the
fundamental pulse, the other stream as the fundamental pulse, and as a linear composite
of the two.294
Summers et al. also examined the potential for transfer effects regarding practice
of polyrhythms.295 Subjects who practiced a 5:3 polyrhythm were then asked to perform
the polyrhythm under a variety of conditions: reverse-hand arrangement, as fast as
possible, and with a concurrent memory task. Additionally, subjects were asked to
perform previously unrehearsed 3:2, 5:2, 4:3, and 5:4 polyrhythms. Results indicated that
the polyrhythms were performed with a high degree of accuracy in within-transfer
conditions, but transfer to tasks involving the new polyrhythms was poor.296
Because coordinated patterns have been shown to be amenable to training, the
mechanisms underlying learning and performance are of great interest to scientists and
those in associated health-related fields. Acquisition of new coordination patterns is
often considered in relationship to modes of coordination that have been previously
Pressing, Summers, and Magill, “Cognitive Multiplicity,” 1127-48.

293
J. Summers, “Practice and Training in Bimanual Coordination Tasks:

294
Strategies and Constraints,” Brain and Cognition 48 (2002): 173.
Summers et al., “Production of Polyrhythms,” 416-28.

295
J. J. Summers, “Learning and Transfer of Multifrequency Patterns.” In Rhythm

296
Perception and Production, ed. P. Desain and L. Windsor (Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger,
2000): 69-80.
96
discussed.297 Swinnen suggests that the nature of pre-existing preferred patterns and the
tendency toward phase and frequency synchronization can often account for difficulties
in learning new coordination patterns.298 This implies that learning coordination skills
may involve two components: overcoming basic action patterns299 and re-integrating
action patterns. Efficiency in formation of the neural connections associated with the
new action patterns is dependent upon both extrinsic and intrinsic conditions. For
example, differences between individuals may be the result of genetic predisposition for
neural plasticity.300 On the other hand, it has been suggested that instructional techniques
have the ability to enhance the learning process. This is particularly true when the
297
See Kelso, Dynamic Patterns; Zanone and Kelso, “The Evolution of Behavioral
Attractors with Learning,” 403-21; S. Swinnen et al., “Preferred and Induced
Coordination Modes During the Acquisition of Bimanual Movements with a 2:1
Frequency Ratio,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance 23 (1997): 1087-1110; S. P. Swinnen, “Age-Related Deficits in Motor
Learning and Differences in Feedback Processing During the Production of a Bimanual
Coordination Pattern,” Cognitive Neuropsychology 15 (1998): 439-66; and P. Zanone
and J. Kelso, “Coordination Dynamics of Learning and Transfer: Collective and
Component Levels,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance 23 (1997): 1454-80.
Swinnen, “Intermanual Coordination,” 355.

298
299
See T. D. Lee, S. P. Swinnen, and S. Verschueren, “Relative Phase Alterations
During Bimanual Skill Acquisition,” Journal of Motor Behavior 27 (1995): 263-74; G.
Schöner et al., “Learning as Change of Coordination Dynamics: Theory and Experiment,”
Journal of Motor Behavior 24 (1992): 29-48; S. P. Swinnen and C. B. Walter,
“Constraints in Coordinating Limb Movements,” in Cognition and Action in Skilled
Behaviour, ed. A. M. Colley and J. R. Beech (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1988), 127-
43; S. P. Swinnen et al., “Acquiring Bimanual Skills: Contrasting Forms of Information
Feedback for Interlimb Decoupling,” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning,
Memory, and Cognition 19 (1993): 1328-44; and Zanone, and Kelso, “The Evolution of
Behavioral Attractors with Learning,” 403-21.
S. P. Swinnen, “Intermanual Coordination,” 355.

300
97
desired action is conceptualized as a familiar symbol or entity301 or when feedback
techniques integrate information from the respective limbs in a meaningful way.302
E. A. Franz et al., “Spatial Conceptual Influences on the Coordination of

301
Bimanual Actions: When a Dual Task Becomes a Single Task,” Journal of Motor
Behavior 33 (2001): 103-12.
See S. P. Swinnen et al., “Preferred and Induced Coordination Modes,” 1087-

302
1110; Swinnen, “Age-Related Deficits,” 439-66; Zanone, and Kelso, “The Evolution of
Behavioral Attractors with Learning,” 403-21; Lee, Swinnen, and Verschueren, “Relative
Phase Alterations,” 263-74, and F. Mechsner et al., “Perceptual Basis of Bimanual
Coordination,” Nature 414 (2001): 69-73.
98
CHAPTER 5
THE CHOPIN ETUDES AND SKILL ACQUISITION
Whiteside observed that, “each Etude simply highlights one aspect of the
technical equipment; each Etude uses all of the equipment all the time.”303 If one studies
the Chopin études for the purpose of developing particular aspects of technique, how
does one learn to utilize the “technical equipment” to perform them successfully and to
realize the artistic and physical ideals consistent with Chopin’s philosophy? Depending
upon the motor skills one has developed, studying the études could involve learning to
perform novel movements and/or enhancing the coordination of existing patterns of
movement. To that end, when combined with musical intuition and basic physiological
knowledge, Chopin’s interpretive markings may be of particular interest and help to the
pianist. Upon close examination of the dynamic and articulation markings in particular, I
believe that Chopin’s markings are not only interpretive but also suggest particular
movements and gestures that facilitate playing the études. The following is a discussion
of particular technical aspects and possible physical interpretation of Chopin’s stylistic
markings in representative études.
Force Gradation:
Chopin Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 3, 6, and 11; Op. 25, No. 3; and KK II b/3 Nr. 2
Gradation of force is a vital component of playing the piano in terms of dynamics,
color, and musical line, and it appears to be a particularly integral component of Chopin

303
99
Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 3, 6, and 11 (see Figures 1, 2, and 3); Op. 25, No. 3 (see Figure 4);
and KK II b/3 Nr. 2 (see Figure 5).
Figure 1. Etude Op. 10, No. 3, Measures 1-4. Matching tone and shaping the melodic
line in the uppermost voice while integrating inner voices of the accompaniment in the
right hand. (Quoted from Frédéric Chopin, Sämtliche Etüden, hg. Von Paul Badura-
Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Wien 1973/2005 (UT 50205). Printed by permission).
Figure 2. Etude Op. 10, No. 6, Measures 1-3. Relatively slow tempo, long melodic
notes, and intricate figuration marked “sempre legatissimo” in the left hand. (Copyright
1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
100
Figure 3. Etude Op. 10, No. 11, Measures 1-3. “Voicing” the uppermost voice to project
the melodic line amidst the harmonic support of the other voices. (Copyright 1983 G.
Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Figure 4. Etude Op. 25, No. 3, Measures 1-3. Parallel and contrary motion between the
hands. Small melodic germs requiring one to think of the longer phrase as well as the
slur markings. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Figure 5. Nouvelles Etudes KK II b/3 Nr. 2, Measures 1-4. Voicing the melody amongst
chords in close proximity requiring subtle and seamless changes of fingering. (Copyright
1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
101
The tempo indication for Op. 10, No. 6 is Andante. The étude requires legato
touch from note to note and mentally “thinking through” the tone in longer notes to
facilitate matching intensity and the perception of a seamless melodic line (see Figure 2).
Legato and staccato need redefining as they are related to piano playing. For singer
and string player, connecting tones produce an entirely different effect from the
connection of piano tones. The actual holding of the tone with the breath or the bow is
an expression of the emotional reaction involved with the music, because the dynamics
are controlled throughout the holding process. This is not so with the piano. . . . Any
projection of emotion, through the use of dynamics, must deal with the intensity of
tones at the moment of production. It is this relation of the intensity of tones at the
moment of their inception that almost entirely conveys the feeling of legato. Thus,
tonal relationships are more meaningful at the piano not through key connection but
through gradation in the energy used at the moment of tone production.304
The left hand is marked “sempre legatissimo” in accompanying the long notes of
the right, and the phrase markings highlight the importance of approaching the figures
with the largest mechanism possible, not just the fingers. A particularly interesting facet
is the parallel motion between the hands in executing the sixteenth notes and contrary
motion in the subsequent eighth notes.
Op. 10, No. 11 requires voicing the arpeggiations in each hand such that the
highest voice “speaks” melodically above the harmonic support of the inner voices (see
Figure 3). The staccato articulation marks over the first eighth notes of the measure
encourage a release of tension and initiate preparation for the shift of position that
follows. While the dots may also suggest a particular color of tone, they do not affect the
duration of the notes since the damper pedal is depressed. This supports the view that the
dots have specific implications with regard to physical execution. Voicing subsequent
Ibid., 183-4.
304
102
chords is facilitated if one truly heeds the phrase marking over each gesture indicating the
balance of the hand be shifted toward the little finger.
The middle, ring, and little fingers execute the melodic line in Op. 25, No. 3 (see
Figure 4). The suggested fingerings place the middle finger on the first note of each
three-note musical germ. The slur markings over each of these groups suggest a
continuous pattern of wrist movement beginning with a drop of the wrist initiating the
phrase with the middle finger followed by progressive release of the wrist.
Voicing the melody in KK II b/3 Nr. 2 is a particular challenge amid the close
proximity of the chords (see Figure 5). Furthermore, the phrase markings indicate
musical ideas at least four measures in length. Attention to the phrasing involves caring
for the continuity of the melodic line which incorporates repeated notes that might be
played with the same finger.
Etude Op. 10, No. 3
Op. 10, No. 3 requires matching tone from note to note and shaping the melodic
line in the uppermost voice while also integrating inner voices of the accompaniment in
the right hand (see Figure 1). Employing fingerings suggested by Chopin involves using
the same finger on consecutives notes and, at times, crossing the little finger under the
ring finger (see Figure 6).305 Although Chopin’s approach to fingering shocked many of
his contemporaries, he felt that certain fingerings made it possible to achieve particular
colors of sound. Associating particular qualities with each finger, he encouraged
Frédéric Chopin, Etüden, (Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 1983), 22-5.

305
103
cultivation of these differences.306 “There are, then, many different qualities of sound,
just as there are several fingers. The point is to utilize the differences; and this, in other
words, is the art of fingering.”307
Figure 6. Etude Op. 10, No. 3, Measures 5-8. Fingerings suggested by the composer use
the same finger on consecutives notes and, at times, crossing the little finger under the
ring finger. Note the use of crescendo and decrescendo in m. 5 coinciding with the ring
and little fingers. (Quoted from Frédéric Chopin, Sämtliche Etüden, hg. Von Paul
Badura-Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Wien 1973/2005 (UT 50205). Printed by
permission).
Finger substitutions and crossing fingers make it possible to physically connect
the melodic notes, but a sensitive ear and the ability to implement what the mind hears is
necessary to achieve the illusion of legato. The dynamic markings indicating subtle
swells and shapes encourage the ring and little fingers, those fingers which are the least
individuated and typically the weakest functionally, to play with more energy thereby
Marianne Ullyot, “Chopin and Liszt: A Legacy of Teaching,” Journal of the

306
American Liszt Society 10 (1981): 40.
James Huneker, Chopin; The Man and His Music (New York: C. Scribner’s
307
Sons, 1900), 53.

104
utilizing and accounting for some of the inherent physical differences amongst the fingers
(see Figure 6.)
Phrase markings and accents also provide clues to execution. The accent over the
quarter note in the right hand of m. 7, for example, implies a drop of the wrist and some
amount of energy initiating the ensuing grace note and sixteenths in the same measure.
Finger Independence: Chopin Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 2, 4, 8 and 12
With those by Chopin, pianists encounter études devoted to both the development
of finger independence and the ability to grade force. A particularly interesting
phenomenon is the apparent tradeoff between accuracy in force production and finger
independence.308 In other words, finger independence seems to diminish as accuracy in
force production increases.
Chopin Etudes Op. 10, Nos. 2, 4, 8, and 12 focus explicitly on the overall
development of finger independence. Op. 10, No. 2 is noteworthy for aiming to develop
independence of the little, middle, and ring fingers, those fingers that have been
demonstrated to be the least independent (see Figure 7).309 The fingerings Chopin
indicated entail crossing the middle finger over both the ring and little fingers and
crossing the ring finger over the little finger in ascending passages while descending
passages involved alternating either the ring and little finger or the ring and middle
Chiang et al., “Practice-Related Modulations,” 1033-43.

308
Häger-Ross and Schieber, “Quantifying the Independence,” 8542-50.

309
105
finger.310 Op. 10, No. 4 features scale-like passagework and intricate four-note finger
patterns facilitated by wrist and forearm rotation (see Figure 8).
Figure 7. Etude Op. 10, No. 2, Measures 1-2. Fingerings Chopin indicated entail
crossing the middle finger over both the ring and little fingers and crossing the ring finger
over the little finger in ascending passages. Descending passages involve alternating
either the ring and little finger or the ring and middle finger. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle
Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Figure 8. Etude Op. 10, No. 4, Measures 1-2. Scale-like passagework and intricate four-
note finger patterns facilitated by wrist and forearm rotation. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle
Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Op. 10 No. 12, emphasizing the use of the left hand in melodic passagework, will
be discussed in greater detail in subsequent sections of this chapter.
Chopin, Etüden, 18-21.

310
106
Etude Op. 10, No. 8
Four-note arpeggio figures incorporating step-wise links dominate Op. 10, No. 8
(see Figure 9). The accents occurring on each beat suggest a drop of the wrist on the
middle or ring fingers or the thumb depending on the direction of the melodic line and the
particular pattern (see Figure 10). In addition to the phrase marks over each ascending
and descending figure, the implied use of the wrist suggests use of larger mechanisms in
addition to the fingers, coordination that will facilitate speed and help prevent fatigue.
Additionally, the phrase markings direct the ear and upper arm to care for the longer line.
In this case, one must coordinate finger independence with upper arm motion in addition
to wrist and forearm rotation. Some rotation occurs as consecutive fingers are played. A
pattern of rotation is also initiated in places where the figuration is more tightly
constructed (see Figure 11, mm. 27-28). In these instances, the rotation occurs more
quickly and frequently than in mm. 1-2, for example.
Figure 9. Etude Op. 10, No. 8, Measures 1-2. Four-note arpeggio figures incorporating
step-wise links. Note the accents on each beat and the phrase markings over each
descending and ascending gesture. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed
by permission.)
107
Figure 10. Etude Op. 10, No. 8, Measures 8-13. Accents corresponding to drops of the
wrist on the middle finger and thumb. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich.
Printed by permission.)
Figure 11. Etude Op. 10, No. 8, Measures 26-29. Figuration requiring more rapid and
frequent wrist and forearm rotation. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed
by permission.)
108
Left Hand Facility: Chopin Etude Op. 10, No. 12
The technical challenges of Op. 10, No. 12 are largely constructed by way of
elaboration and alteration of three primary figures based on scales and arpeggios. The
first pattern, spanning nearly three octaves in two measures, is a decorated arpeggiation
of the opening G dominant seventh-chord in the right hand (see Figure 12). The second
pattern, arpeggiation of the tonic triad and added ninth (see Figure 13), establishes the
tonic key while the final pattern, an intricate chromatic scale (see Figure 14), ushers a
return to the tonic key and principal theme.
Figure 12. Etude Op. 10, No. 12, Measures 1-3. Decorated arpeggiation of the opening
G dominant seventh-chord in the right hand. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich.
Figure 13. Etude Op. 10, No. 12, Measures 10-12. Arpeggiation of the tonic triad and
added ninth establishing the tonic key. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich.
109
Figure 14. Etude Op. 10, No. 12, Measures 13-18. Intricate chromatic scale ushering a
return to the tonic key and principal theme. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich.
Etude Op. 10, No. 12, mm. 1-2
Two-joint and multi-joint muscles are incapable of shortening to the extent
required to produce a full range of motion at all joints crossed simultaneously.311 For
example, when the wrist is flexed, the fingers are able to generate only a fraction of their
maximal force. Altering the position of the wrist also initiates subtle changes in the use
and coordination of the physical mechanisms which helps prevent fatigue.
The accents over the sixteenth notes which lie on each beat in mm. 1-2 (see
Figure 12) are significant because they suggest a drop in the wrist which is important. As
Whiteside noted in her discussion of the études, the wrist has the ability to facilitate such
Susan, J. Hall, Basic Biomechanics, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003),
311
160-1.
110
elaborated passagework.312 Because the muscles responsible for flexing the fingers cross
several joints, finger function is affected by the position of the joints. Here, led perhaps
by the upper arm, the wrist can carry the hand and allow the fingers to articulate while
not being solely responsible for depressing each key. To that end, as mentioned
previously, while a particular part of the physical mechanism is highlighted in each étude,
the ingredients remain the same. It is therefore often the balance in integrating the
mechanisms that facilitates technical execution.
Etude Op. 10, No. 12, m. 9
The accompaniment pattern initiated in m. 9 requires crossing both the ring and
middle fingers over the thumb. “To facilitate passing the thumb under the other fingers
and passing the fingers over, the hand was to be given a corresponding turn inward.”313
The figure is then varied to suit the harmonic progression in mm. 14-16 (see Figure 14).
Phrase markings here suggest the association of a single fluid physical gesture
incorporating rotation from the little finger to the thumb and back with each arpeggio
figure. The gesture is then varied as the patterns last either for two or four beats.
Thematic material
While the challenges of the left hand are formidable, pianists must not allow the
technical difficulties to eclipse the thematic substance of the right hand. “One of the
commonest experiences in the concert hall, during a performance of an Étude, is hearing
one hand played in a scintillating manner while the other one is insensitive and
312
Mikuli, Vorwort to Fr. Chopin’s Pianoforte-Werke, 3.

313
111
pedestrian. The technical problems have been solved—the music has been lost.”314 To
that end, Chopin was exact in his performance and insistence of dynamic shading and
nuance in both hands. “In performance you should develop an ample, full and rounded
tone; shade the scale of nuances with infinite gradations between pianissimo and
fortissimo, though in pianissimo avoid any indistinct muttering, just as in fortissimo avoid
the sort of pounding that would hurt a sensitive ear.”315 Executing the dynamics indicated
in mm. 62-64 requires not only careful monitoring of the sound from note to note or
chord to chord (see Figure 15), but managing separate scenarios for the hands as well.
For example, the left hand patterns are based on continuous cycles of crescendo and
decrescendo occurring either once or twice per measure whereas the right hand often
observes dynamics opposite those of the left hand. This coordination would likely be
developed in the initial phases of learning the étude in which slow performance is heavily
reliant upon sensory guidance. Finally, it is worth noting that practice at different
dynamic levels, which would require various levels of force, is written into the étude to
some extent. For example, the principal theme first appears forte in mm. 10-11 while it is
designated piano in mm. 20-21 (see Figures 13 and 16). Presumably, these differences
would be reflected in the corresponding accompaniment figures as well. Properties of
muscle are dependent upon a balance of characteristics to facilitate such variety.
Prostakoff and Rosoff, eds., Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 105.

314
Koczalski, Frédéric Chopin. Betrachtungen, Skizzen, Analysen, 12.

315
112
Figure 15. Etude Op. 10, No. 12, Measures 61-66. Dynamics requiring careful
monitoring of the sound from note to note or chord to chord and managing separate
scenarios for the hands. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by
permission.)
Figure 16. Etude Op. 10, No. 12, Measures 19-21. Thematic material marked piano in
comparison to m. 10 where it is marked forte. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag,
Munich. Printed by permission.)
The Thumb: Chopin Etude Op. 10, No. 5
Eigeldinger suggests that melodic use of the thumb on the black keys in Op. 10,
No. 5 is one of the significant technical innovations of the Chopin études. Op. 10, No. 5
requires integrating forearm and wrist rotation with articulation of the thumb and fingers
to achieve facile execution and brilliant tone quality. In particular, in mm. 23-26, for
113
example, it is clear from the phrase markings that Chopin suggested use of wrist and
forearm rotation to play either adjacent notes or those separated by a seventh, the seventh
between the A-flat and high G-flat in this case (see Figure 17). The articulation markings
over each G-flat imply a particular quality of sound but also a release of muscle tension
in the hand and forearm preparing the playing mechanism for the next gesture. Surely
one must balance use of the fingers as articulators as well, but use of the wrist and
forearm will facilitate speed and ease. Because this étude is in the key of G-flat major,
the pianist must become comfortable executing movements primarily on the black keys
with the hands farther from the body and the wrists necessarily higher than on the white
keys.
Figure 17. Etude Op. 10, No. 15, Measures 20-26. Note the phrase markings in mm. 23-
26 suggesting wrist and forearm rotation. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich.
114
Measures 1-4 present the basic patterns that are fundamental to the étude (see
Figure 18). A descending G-flat major arpeggiation spanning approximately two octaves
consisting of thirds, fourths, and sixths in mm. 1-2 is followed by an ascending dominant
arpeggio consisting of fourths, fifths, and octaves. Wrist and forearm rotation may aid
execution of the fragments involving smaller intervals, as in beat two of m. 1, for
example. Rotation also facilitates the coverage of keyboard distance and change of
direction occurring on the first beat of m. 3 as the D-flat is a common harmonic link
between the first two measures and mm. 3-4. In the ascending passage in m. 3, a drop of
the wrist coincides with the thumb and initiates an arc of movement that is larger than the
mechanisms of rotation and which carries the hand to m. 5 in this instance.
Figure 18. Etude Op. 10, No. 5, Measures 1-7. Note the fundamental pattern of the
étude. A descending G-flat major arpeggiation spanning approximately two octaves is
followed by an ascending dominant arpeggio consisting of fourths, fifths, and octaves.
(Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
115
The thumb and little finger are particularly important since they contact the piano
key and place the hand in its new position in the descending and ascending patterns,
respectively. In descending patterns for example, it is the upper arm, forearm, hand, and
thumb that bring the fourth and fifth fingers into position to continue the pattern.
Furthermore, as Whiteside notes, “If these details are accurately timed with the
progression of the first lever [upper arm], and this lever keeps its control of distances and
level, there will be no consciousness of any break in the legato when the hand is passed to
the new position on the keyboard.”316
Speed: Chopin Etudes Op. 10, No. 4 and Op. 25, No. 12
Etude Op. 10, No. 4
One of the primary challenges of Op. 10, No. 4 appears to be rapid execution of
scalar and arpeggiated figures requiring different amounts of rotation (see Figure 19).
This étude requires development of this coordination in each hand which ultimately
requires the training of non-homologous muscles since the direction of the figuration is
the same regardless of which hand has the pattern. In his fingerings and articulation
markings, Chopin seems to have offered clues as to how to approach the étude physically.

316
116
Figure 19. Etude Op. 10, No. 4, Measures 1-8. Scalar and arpeggiated figures requiring
varying degrees of rotation. (Quoted from Frédéric Chopin, Sämtliche Etüden, hg. Von
Paul Badura-Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Wien 1973/2005 (UT 50205). Printed by
permission).
The accent mark on the first beat of m. 1 encourages a bounce of the wrist
facilitating a release of tension functioning as a preparatory gesture to the phrase
beginning on the second sixteenth note of the same measure. In many ways, Chopin
incorporated the conductor’s preparatory gesture with this accent.
The fingerings Chopin indicated in the first measure, with the thumb of the right
hand playing the third sixteenth note of every beat, initiate a pattern of rotation occurring
every four sixteenth notes through the first half of beat one in the second measure. The
117
first G-sharp in m. 2 functions both as the second half of the scalar four-note pattern
which began two sixteenths earlier and as the beginning of a new pattern of rotation
toward the little finger and back to either the index finger or thumb on beats two, three,
and four.
Accents and phrase markings in m. 3 facilitate a drop of the wrist on each beat.
They imply cyclical rotation from the thumb toward the little finger and the highest note
of the gesture and returning to the thumb and the beginning of another cycle on the next
beat.
Phrase markings corresponding to the melody in m. 4 suggest rotation from the
thumb to the little finger and further indicate and allow a non-legato approach between
the top note of one octave and the first note of the pattern that follows.
The processes occurring in the right hand in mm. 1-4 are similar in the left hand
but sometimes employ subtle differences in expected fingerings. For example, whereas
the thumb initiates the right-hand pattern in m. 1, and one might therefore expect the little
finger of the left hand to function similarly, it is instead the fourth finger of the left hand
that balances the hand in rotation in m. 6 (see Figure 19). Likewise, whereas the right
hand rotates to the little finger in m. 2, in order to maintain the tonal relationships in m. 6,
the left hand rotates toward the thumb.
The thematic material of the entire étude is generated from the first four measures.
As discussed above, the theme appears in both hands, and it appears in various keys.
This in turn changes the spatial relationship between the hands and the body. For
example, in m. 25, the theme appears a diminished fourth higher than in m. 1 (see Figure
118
20), and the suggested fingerings place the index finger on the lowest note of each of the
four-note patterns. The challenge in this case and in similar places is maintaining the
ease of executing a basic pattern of rotation despite changes in the patterns of black and
white keys which ultimately affect the balance of the hand.
Figure 20. Etude Op. 10, No. 4, Measures 24-29. Theme appears a diminished fourth
higher than in m. 1. (Quoted from Frédéric Chopin, Sämtliche Etüden, hg. Von Paul
Badura-Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Wien 1973/2005 (UT 50205). Printed by
permission).
Etude Op. 25, No. 12
Propelling the hands laterally up and down the keyboard is one of the chief skills
to be mastered in Op. 25, No. 12 (see Figure 21). For the most part, accent marks appear
on the first and third beats of the measure and coincide with changes in direction of the
figuration. As such, the accents not only suggest harmonic significance but
corresponding drops of the wrists as well. In general, the phrase markings incorporate a
119
sweep up and back down the keyboard and lead the ear to the harmonic progressions
highlighted by the accented notes.
Figure 21. Etude Op. 25, No. 12, Measures 1-2. Gestures requiring smooth lateral
movements. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Within these gestures, one must change hand positions on the repeated notes in
order to travel the lateral distance. The lack of accent marks and the longer phrase
markings indicate that the changes of position must occur smoothly to maintain the
musical line. Some amount of forearm rotation is surely necessarily to execute each set
of three notes if the fingers are not to be entirely responsible for depressing the keys and
facilitating the changes of position without particular articulation of the occurrence.
“Passing is always easy if the power travels smoothly and maintains the control of
placement and level, and if the hand is propelled into position by the two large levers. . . .
The hand [and not the fingers] should do whatever it can to take lateral distance.”317 The
fingerings Chopin indicated in Op. 10, No. 10 suggest a regular pattern of arm and wrist

317
120
rotation with the thumb playing all of the single notes in the right hand and the highest
notes being played presumably by either the ring or little fingers depending on hand size.
Flexibility and Suppleness via Imagery: Etude Op. 25, No. 1
A study in cantabile playing, the “Harp Etude” presents several challenges
involving flexibility, speed, and conceptualizing tone in highlighting the melody over
continuous sextuplet figures in the accompaniment (see Figure 22). Managing the melody
and accompaniment requires flexibility and suppleness of the wrists and arms to facilitate
playing each sextuplet figure as a single gesture comprising the phrase as opposed to
articulating each note individually with the fingers. “To alert the upper arm to take the
place of fingers in responding to the aural image is the task which comes first in
achieving the desired coordination in the playing mechanism for virtuosity in playing the
Etudes.”318 “Abby Whiteside’s work on the control of playing by the upper arm helped
her to discover that the physical continuity which the upper arm exerts through its pull is
not only the basis of speed without strain, it is also the essential physical counterpart of
musical continuity—the continuity within the phrase, and in the phrase-to-phrase
progression.”319
318
Ibid., 31.
Prostakoff and Rosoff, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 4.

319
121
Figure 22. Etude Op. 25, No. 1, Measures 1-2. Importance of flexibility and suppleness
in balancing the melody amongst continuous sextuplet figures. (Copyright 1983 G.
Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by permission.)
Continuity in the melody over the course of phrases requires care in matching the
tone of successive melody notes within a framework of listening for the direction and
completion of the phrase.
The fact is, the student who is accustomed to notewise listening will not always hear
the subtleties of dynamics and timing which are involved, and when, on rare occasions,
he does hear them he will not always prefer the superior, more continuous
performance. The notes seem to go by too fast, in too bland a fashion. He wants to
stop and listen to each note in turn. . . . Training the ear to listen phrasewise or, as
Abby Whiteside would say, “with a rhythm,” calls for establishing an involvement
with the upper arm—specifically with the pull exerted by the upper arm—because the
circular joint by which it is connected with the torso enables the arm to control
horizontal progression—the progression between the notes of the phrase.320
The ear and the upper arm are therefore significant components in successfully
playing this étude, but how does one shift importance from the fingers to the upper arm in
practice? Whiteside’s image of the lariat is particularly appropriate in discussing this
coordination.
The upper arm is the fulcrum for the forearm. The fulcrum-force in the upper arm is
the pull which controls the level at which tone is produced, as well as the slight turning

320
122
of the humerus which controls distance. The illustration of this fulcrum-force in the
upper arm, which seems most pertinent to me, is the control of a lariat: All of the
patterns which the rope is made to go through are controlled by the hand as an
extension of the primary action of the upper arm, as it makes miniature turnings, plus a
consistent and continuous slight pull at the shoulder joint. Tiny actions produce
fantastic shapes and patterns with the loop of the rope. Tiny actions in the upper arm
produce great beauty in performance. Let the arm stop this slight turning and pulling,
and the rope falls to the ground.321
It is worth noting that the rotary movements of the upper arm Whiteside describes
are “miniature.” That is, while its importance cannot be overstated, the movement itself
must not be exaggerated. The movement must be natural or one will have created
another difficulty. What provides the impetus for the upper arm in playing this étude?
According to both Whiteside and Chopin, it is a sharp aural image that lays the
foundation. “It is said that Chopin explained to one of his pupils the manner in which
this study should be executed. ‘Imagine,’ he said, ‘a little shepherd who takes refuge in a
peaceful grotto from an approaching storm. In the distance rushes the wind and the rain,
while the shepherd gently plays a melody in his flute.’”322 Whiteside goes even further
and links the aural image with the physical response to the basic rhythm of the piece.
A sensitive, phrase-wise performance will not take place—no matter how much
scholarship, emotional involvement, and natural musical endowment is present—
unless the performer uses this basic rhythm continuously whether he is aware of it or
not. It is only when the emotional response to the aural image of the music creates in
the performer’s body a physical response, a basic rhythm, as a counterpart to the
Ibid., 38.
321
322
Jean Ckeczynski [Jan Kleczynski], Chopin’s Greater Works, trans. with
additions by Natalie [sic] Janotha (London, William Reeves, 188?), 19; quoted in Jean-
Jacques Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist and Teacher as Seen by His Pupils, trans. by
Naomi Shohet with Hrysia Osostowica and Roy Howatt, ed. by Roy Howatt
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 69.
123
rhythmic flow in a composition, that he is enabled to realize to the fullest extent the
beauty inherent in the music.323
Polyrhythms: Drei Etüden: KK II b/3, No. 1
It has been demonstrated indirectly by Peters and Schwartz and directly by Klapp
et al. that the hands are not independent in performance of polyrhythms even at
intermediate speeds.324 Additionally, a recent study of pianists and guitarists revealed
decreased inhibition between the hemispheres of the brain which might actually facilitate
bimanual coordination by increasing signal transfer between the hemispheres.325 There is
a continuum of cognitive and perceptual monitoring from slow speeds up to about six
notes per second that is detailed and fine-grained. However as speed increases beyond
approximately six notes per second, control becomes global and more coarse. The
incorporation of polyrhythms into technical study is therefore noteworthy and significant
as pianists further develop, not independence, but bi-manual coordination.
It is obvious regarding his philosophy of advocating scale practice in patterns of
four notes against three that Chopin viewed polyrhythms as a unique technical challenge.
Furthermore, polyrhythms are an integral component of his études. Coordinating the
323
See M. Peters and S. Schwartz, “Coordination of the Two Hands and Effects of
324
Attentional Manipulation in the Production of a Bimanual 2:3 Polyrhythm,” Australian

Journal of Psychology 41(2) (1989): 215-24 and S. T. Klapp, J. M. Nelson, and R. J.
Jagacinski, “Can People Tap Concurrent Bimanual Rhythms Independently?” Journal of
Motor Behavior 30(4) (1998): 301-22.
325
M. C. Ridding, B. Brouwer, and M. A. Nordstrom, “Reduced Interhemispheric
Inhibition in Musicians,” Experimental Brain Research 133(2) (July 2000): 249-53.
124
hands in continuous 4:3 polyrhythms is one of the obvious challenges of the first of three
études composed for the method of Moscheles and Fétis (see Figure 23), and yet the
individual parts require subtle skill.
Figure 23. Etude KK II b/3, No. 1, Measures 1-11. Though primarily focused on the 4:3
polyrhythm, note the close proximity of the hands and the crossing of fingers over the
thumb in the left hand in m. 5. (Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich. Printed by
permission.)
The quarter note triplet figures of the right hand and the duple figures of the left
hand are established separately in the first eight measures. These figures present several
challenges. First, the melodic figure in m. 1 begins after the first beat of the measure, and
it is fingered with the thumb. As the phrase mark indicates, the pianist must listen
carefully to execute the beginning of the melody as a preparatory gesture, to refrain from
accenting the thumb, and to maintain the integrity of the intended line. Continuity is
achieved in shaping the melody over the barline of each measure, a pattern that continues
in the étude with long phrases throughout. The eighth notes in the left hand require
125
crossing fingers over the thumb in harmonic arpeggiations. The lowest note of these
arpeggiations is played with the little finger, and movement of the forearm and hand
facilitates rotation to and over the thumb. A drop of the wrist coinciding with the little
finger may be used at the beginning of each cycle of rotation, however; it must be
unobtrusive and within the scope of the line. Changes of the damper pedal occur each
measure with the changes of harmony, but care is needed to monitor clarity of the right
hand due to the chromaticism of the melody and the sound of the modern piano.
Furthermore, the proximity of the hands also necessitates care in balance and voicing the
melody (see Figure 23, m. 9).

126
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS
Strategies for Learning and Teaching
Practice and Performance
Since it has been demonstrated that performance gains are positively correlated to
practice, what parameters of practice might be altered to facilitate and enhance
performance? The following discussion considers types of practice that might be
beneficial, piano literature and exercises that might be helpful, and instructional strategies
that might be particularly effective.
Parameters of mental practice pertaining to effectiveness
It has been suggested that benefits in physical performance are particularly
significant when training involves a combination of physical and mental practice.326
Wohldmann, Healy, and Bourne Jr. have recently suggested that “these benefits might
derive from the fact that the same memory representations are used in both types of
practice,” and that “mental practice may work by activating and strengthening
representations formed previously by physical practice.”327
C. B. Corbin, “Mental Practice,” in Ergogenic Aids and Muscular Performance,

326
ed. W. P. Morgan (New York: Academic Press, 1972), 93-118.
E. L. Wohldmann, A. F. Healy, and L. E. Bourne Jr., “Pushing the Limits of

327
Imagination: Mental Practice for Learning Sequences,” Journal of Experimental

Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33(1) (2007): 254.
127
Although there is evidence suggesting that mental practice can be an effective
ergogenic aid,328 there are apparently parameters related to the effectiveness of its use in
practice. In combining the results of numerous studies concerning mental practice, a
meta-analysis of the literature pertaining to mental practice, Driskell, Copper, and Moran
determined that the effectiveness of mental practice is moderated by the type of task, the
interval between practice and performance, and the duration of mental practice.329
With regard to the type of task, Driskell, Copper, and Moran concluded that,
while mental practice was effective in both cognitive and physical tasks, it appeared to be
particularly effective the more a particular task required cognitive activities. For
musicians, this may highlight the importance of basic musicianship skills in addition to
intellectual and interpretive analysis of a particular piece of music.
328
See R. S. Sackett, “The Influence of Symbolic Rehearsal Upon the Retention of
a Maze Habit,” Journal of General Psychology 10 (1934): 376-95; Ibid., “The
Relationship Between Amount of Symbolic Rehearsal and Retention of a Maze Habit,”
Journal of General Psychology 13, (1935): 113-28; H. M. Perry, “The Relative
Efficiency of Actual and Imaginary Practice in 5 Selected Tasks,” Archives of Psychology
4 (1939): 5-75; R. A. Vandell, R. A. Davis, and N. A. Clugston, “Function of Mental
Practice in the Acquisition of Motor Skills,” Journal of General Psychology 29 (1943):
243-50; E. D. Ryan and J. Simons, “Efficacy of Mental Imagery in Enhancing Mental
Rehearsal Motor Skills,” Journal of Sport Psychology 4 (1982): 41-51; S. L. Ross, “The
Effectiveness of Mental Practice in Improving the Performance of College Trombonists,”
Journal of Research in Music Education 33 (1985): 221-30; C. Lee, “Psyching up for a
Muscular Endurance Task: Effects of Image Content on Performance and Mood State,”
Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 12 (1990): 66-73; and E. L. Wohldmann, A. F.
Healy, and L. E. Bourne Jr., “Pushing the Limits of Imagination: Mental Practice for
Learning Sequences,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition 33(1) (2007): 254-61.
J. Driskell, C. Copper, and A. Moran, “Does Mental Practice Enhance

329
Performance?” Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4) (1994): 481-92.

128
Prior to much of the scientific research in this area, Whiteside seemed to have
been a proponent of this notion in insisting on the importance of understanding the
structure of a piece and responding physically and emotionally to one’s impression of a
piece.
A primary tool for achieving a basic rhythm [“the continuous activity in the
arms and torso which control the total physical apparatus as the performer plays a
composition.”]330 is outlining a composition. This means playing the highlights and
omitting details (some of the notes of the music). In leaving out details remember that
the sole purpose is to emphasize the structural outline of the music. If this outlining is
done in a cut-and-dried fashion, without the emotional response to the music, it is of no
value. It is only when the outlining intensifies the grace of going forward with a lilting
step, as it were, that it illuminates, quickens, and frees the emotional rhythm in the
torso.”331
Quite interestingly, Driskell, Copper, and Moran concluded that experienced
subjects benefit equally from mental practice in both cognitive and physical activities and
suggested that differences between experienced subjects and novices may indicate that
novices have not formed an approximation of the skill. Therefore, symbolic rehearsal
may not be sufficient to guide novice performance.
The extent to which novices benefit from mental training remains unclear,
however. Several studies have demonstrated that novices may enhance physical
performance through use of mental imagery alone. Kohl and Roenker demonstrated
transfer of learning from use of imagery to physical execution even when mental practice
and performance involved different hands.332 Likewise, a 2007 study by Wohldmann,
Prostakoff and Rosoff, glossary, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 198.

330
Whiteside, Mastering the Chopin Etudes, 53

331
129
Healy, and Bourne Jr. demonstrated that mental practice was sufficient to produce or
maintain a level of performance comparable to that obtained by physical practice.333 A
recent study by Shanks and Cameron, however, resulted in no effect of mental practice in
learning a motor sequence task.334 Differences in the results of these studies are thought
to arise from different emphases on the perceptual, mental, and motor components of the
tasks.335
Driskell, Copper, and Moran also concluded that the effects of mental rehearsal
are most robust when performance immediately follows mental practice. They concluded
that the initial effects of mental practice were reduced to approximately one-half of their
initial magnitude if the period between mental practice and performance was extended to
14 days.
Regarding the duration of the intervention, while it was determined that the
cumulative effect of mental practice was positive, the beneficial effect diminished with
duration. In other words, the longer an individual practices mentally, the less beneficial it
becomes. Based on these results, Driskell, Copper, and Moran suggested a period of
R. M. Kohl and D. L. Roenker, “Mechanism Involvement During Skill

332
Imagery,” Journal of Motor Behavior 15 (1983): 179-90.
333
Wohldmann, Healy, and Bourne Jr., “Pushing the Limits of Imagination,” 254-
61.
D. R. Shanks and A. Cameron, “The Effect of Mental Practice on Performance

334
in a Sequential Reaction Time Task,” Journal of Motor Behavior 32 (2000): 305-13.
335
Wohldmann, Healy, and Bourne Jr., “Pushing the Limits of Imagination,” 254-
61.
130
mental practice of approximately twenty minutes and a regiment of refreshing mental
practice every week or two.
Several other studies have demonstrated that performance gains related to mental
practice occur only when subjects have previous experience with the task.336 Mulder et
al. demonstrated that subjects were unable to learn a novel toe movement with mental
practice alone.337 Only subjects with some experience in the task benefited from mental
practice. The scientists therefore concluded that humans are able to mentally train only
those movements performed before.
Finally, Mulder et al. have recently observed a correlation between age and
imagery capacity noting that elderly subjects displayed slightly worse motor imagery
capacity than younger subjects particularly with regard to first-person imagery.338 Their
results indicated not a general decline in motor imagery capacity, but instead a significant
shift from first-person motor imagery to third-person motor imagery. Mulder et al.
hypothesized that their results might be indicative of a relationship between one’s level of
physical activity and motor imagery capacity. Support for a correlation between physical
336
See C. B. Corbin, “The Effects of Covert Rehearsal on the Development of a
Complex Motor Skill,” Journal of General Psychology 76 (1967): 143-50; R. A. Finke,
Principles of Mental Imagery, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989); and N. Ram et al.,
“A Comparison of Modelling and Imagery in the Acquisition and Retention of Motor
Skills,” Journal of Sports Sciences 25(5) (2007): 587-97.
T. Mulder et al., “The Role of Motor Imagery in Learning a Totally Novel

337
Movement,” Experimental Brain Research 154 (2004): 211-17.
T. Mulder, et al., “Motor Imagery: The Relation Between Age and Imagery
338
Capacity,” Human Movement Science 26 (2007): 203-11.

131
activity and motor image capacity does have support in the literature although the results
should be viewed with caution since some data is based on subjects’ self-reports.
Nevertheless, Colvin and Myers questioned 3,000 children regarding their imagery
abilities and reported that motor imagery was vivid only in children who were constantly
involved in movement experiences.339 Isaac and Marks found that females over 50 years
of age reported significantly less vivid movement imagery than other adults between the
ages of 20 and 50.340 Isaac and Marks suggested that the difference might stem from that
fact that the particular female population is typically not as active as either males of the
same age or younger age groups.
Aural feedback and aural representations
Several studies have highlighted the importance of aural feedback and aural
representations associated with music performance, facets of motor skill acquisition and
motor performance likely unique to musicians. As discussed previously, research by
Schön and Besson substantiates the likelihood that musicians have an auditory-like
representation of written music before they actually play it.341 Furthermore, their research
suggests that, while visuomotor coding may be sufficient to play written notes, an
S. S. Colvin and E. J. Myers, “The Development of Imagination in School

339
Children and the Relation Between Ideational Types and the Retentivity of Material
Appealing to Various Sense Departments,” Review Monographs 11 (1909): 85-125.
A. R. Isaac and D. F. Marks, “Individual Differences in Imagery Experience:

340
Developmental Changes and Specialization,” British Journal of Psychology 85 (1994):

479-500.
Schön and Besson, “Visually Induced Auditory Expectancy,” 694-705.

341
132
anticipated auditory representation of written music is important for an expressive
performance that assigns different significance to each note based upon its structural
function. Schön and Besson’s research suggests that written music may induce both
musical auditory expectancy and motor expectancy. This in turn may point to the likely
subconscious use of auditory imagery and potential for its conscious use as well.
Observational learning
Recent research concerning the discovery of a mirror neuron system in humans
suggests the possible efficacy of observational learning. It is obvious with regard to
piano performance that only the external components of the playing mechanism are
observable. However, it seems clear from research concerning mirror neurons that the
human body automatically responds to the activities of a model and that the human mind
is capable of perceiving and inferring subtle relationships that are not readily observable.
The power of observational learning underscores some of the significant principles in
prominent learning theories suggesting the effectiveness of experiential learning prior to
cognitive conceptualization. For pianists, this suggests benefits associated with concert
attendance and modeling both in the classroom and the private studio.
Scales, piano literature, and the brain
As mentioned earlier, a 2005 study by Parsons et al. compared activated brain
networks of pianists performing both scales and the third movement of J.S. Bach’s Italian
Concerto in F Major (BWV 971).342 Performance of the Bach occurred while
Parsons et al., “The Brain Basis of Piano Performance,” 199-215.

342
133
blindfolded. While there was significant correlation between brain areas activated in
performing scales and the Bach, there were also numerous activations unique to each.
In comparison to performance of scales, performance of the Bach was associated
with activation of subcortical areas including bilateral, predominantly right thalamus and
bilateral basal ganglia. Activation in somatomotor regions included bilateral dorsolateral
premotor cortex (BA6), bilateral primary motor cortex (BA 4), right insula, right SMA,
bilateral lingual gyrus (BA 19 and 18), bilateral posterior cingulate (BA 31 and 23), and
anterior and posterior cerebellum.
On the other hand, performance of scales resulted in strong activations in bilateral
anterior cingulate gyrus (BA 31 and 32), bilateral middle temporal cortex (BA 21), and
right superior temporal cortex (BA 41). In addition, activation was observed in right
frontal regions (BA 9 and 10), right tempoparietal regions (BA 39 and 40), right fusiform
gyrus (BA 37), left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 47), right precuneus (BA 7), and right
primary motor cortex (BA 4). Furthermore, increases in activation were observed in
particular areas of the anterior and posterior cerebellum.
Overall, Parsons et al. observed “unexpected intensity and extent of deactivation
during the performance of Bach. In a conjoint measure of deactivation intensity and
extent (relative to rest), there was 43% greater deactivation throughout the brain during
the Bach performance than scales.”343 The deactivated areas included frontal areas (BA 8,
9, and 44), posterior cingulate areas (BA 31), bilateral middle temporal,
Ibid.
343
134
parahippocampus, precuneus, and posterior cerebellum.344 Although some of the
aforementioned areas were deactivated during the performance of scales, they were
deactivated to a lesser extent. The observed differences in brain activity suggest
functions associated with the cortical and subcortical structures that may underlie playing
the piano and auditory perception.345
The preceding comparisons of activated networks are delimited by the interplay of

various differences in playing scales and the concerto. First, the performance of the
Bach piece requires recalling more complicated information than does scales. Effects
of this variable are probably apparent in the greater activation in auditory association
areas (BA 22 and 21), posterior cingulate, and cuneus and lingual areas. Second, the
concerto performance requires more intricate, controlled fingering and tone
production. This factor is likely reflected in increases in thalamus, basal ganglia, SMA,
insula, dorsolateral premotor cortex, and anterior cerebellum. Third, the concerto
performance requires vividly conveying a comprehension of the musical structure
(e.g., tonality, rhythm, dynamics, interpretative features, etc.). Effects of this factor
may be observed in auditory areas (BA 38, 22, and 21), posterior cerebellum, posterior
cingulate, cuneus, and lingual areas. Fourth, musical performance is associated with
emotional responses, which are likely much more limited when playing scales.
However, areas known to activate during emotional responses to music were not
appreciably active here. Nonetheless, it is possible that activations related to emotional
responses were in posterior cingulate, insula, and basal ganglia. Fifth, the concerto
performance demands more attention than scales. This factor may be reflected in
different ways here. There were no increases for the concerto in core attentional areas,
but the effects may be more diffuse because there was more detected activation overall
than for scales: nearly twice as many distinct foci and 72% greater overall extent of
activation. Moreover, there was nearly 50% greater deactivation overall for the
concerto performance than scales, an effect that may be related to a deepened focus of
attention, as discussed earlier. It is conceivable then that both the greater activations
and greater deactivations are related to differences in attention in the two
performances.346
Ibid.
344
Ibid.
345
Ibid., 212.
346
135
Discussion
There is significant indirect evidence to suggest that studying and performing
different types of exercises and piano literature results in distinct physiological
adaptations and brain activity. The implications could affect the ways in which pianists
practice and build technique. To that end, the aforementioned research by Parsons et al.
demonstrate significant differences in brain activity during performance of Bach’s Italian
Concerto as opposed to scales.347 Results of research by Filimon et al. demonstrate an
overlap between executed, observed, and imagined reaching activations in the human
cortex.348 Furthermore, a growing number of studies have shown that many
neuropsychological and physiological similarities exist between physically executed and
imagined movements.349 These studies suggest that imagined and executed movements
are interrelated and dependent upon the characteristics of the musical task.
Ibid., 199-215.
347
Filimon et al., “Human Cortical Representations for Reaching,” 1315-28.

348
349
See J. Decety et al., “Vegetative Response During Imagined Movement is
Proportional to Imagined Effort,” Behavioural Brain Research 42 (1991): 1-5; Ibid.,
“Central Activation of Autonomic Effectors During Mental Simulation of Motor Actions
in Man,” Journal of Physiology (London) 461 (1993): 549-63; Jeannerod, “The
Representing Brain,” 187-245; M. Jeannerod and J. Decety, “Mental Motor Imagery: A
Window Into the Representational Stages of Action,” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 5
(1995): 727-32; C. Hall, L. Bernoties, and D. Schmidt, “Interference Effects of Mental
Imagery on a Motor Task,” British Journal of Psychology 86 (1995): 181-90; A. Pascual-
Leone et al., “Modulation of Muscle Responses,” 1037-45; J. Decety, “The
Neurophysiological Basis of Motor Imagery,” Behavioral Brain Research 77 (1996): 45-
52; J. Decety and J. Grèzes, “Neural Mechanisms Subserving the Perception of Human
Actions,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3 (1999): 172-8; M. Lotze et al., “Activation of
Cortical and Cerebellar Motor Areas,” 491-501; P. L. Jackson et al., “Potential Role of
136
Pascual-Leone demonstrated that, in comparison to subjects who practiced a
particular five-finger exercise over the course of 5 days, subjects who practiced for the
same amount of time but were not taught the 5-finger sequence displayed changes in
cortical motor output that were similar to but less significant than those who had learned
the sequence.350 This suggests effects associated with specificity of practice.
Collectively, this research may suggest a correlation between imagined
movements, executed movements, physiological adaptation, and cortical structure.
Applied to piano performance and practice, this may highlight the specificity of piano
literature and exercises and suggest the use of methods for developing aspects of
technique particular to them. Further direct research is needed, however. Areas of
interest might compare brain activity during the preparation, practice, and performance of
a broad variety of ètudes and piano repertoire by pianists of different ages and levels of
experience.
Mental Practice Using Motor Imagery in Neurologic Rehabilitation,” Archives of Physical

Medicine and Rehabilitation 82 (2001): 1133-41; and T. Hanakawa et al., “Functional
Properties of Brain Areas Associated with Motor Execution and Imagery,” Journal of
Pascual-Leone et al., “Modulation of Muscle Responses,” 1037-45.

350
137
APPENDIX A: HENLE URTEXT EDITION PERMISSION
With kind permission, Figures 2-5, 7-18, and 21-23 are printed from the Henle Urtext
edition of Chopin’s Etudes, Copyright 1983 G. Henle Verlag, Munich .

138
APPENDIX B: WIENER URTEXT EDITION PERMISSION
With kind permission, Figures 1, 6, 19, and 20 are quoted from Frédéric Chopin,
Sämtliche Etüden, hg. Von Paul Badura-Skoda, Wiener Urtext Edition, Wien 1973/2005
(UT 50205).
139
REFERENCES
Aagaard, P., E. B. Simonsen, J. L. Andersen, S. P. Magnusson, J. Halkjaer-Kristensen,

and P. Dyhre-Poulsen. “Neural Inhibition During Maximal Eccentric and Concentric
Quadriceps Contractions: Effects of Resistance Training.” Journal of Applied
Physiology 89 (2000): 2249-57.
Aagaard, P., E. B. Simonsen, J. L. Andersen, S. P. Magnusson, J. Halkjaer-Kristensen, P.

Dyhre-Poulsen, and E. B. Simonsen. “A Mechanism for Increased Contractile
Strength of Human Pennate Muscle in Response to Strength Training: Changes in
Muscle Architecture.” Journal of Physiology 534 (2001): 613-23.
Aagaard, P., E. B. Simonsen, J. L. Andersen, S. P. Magnusson, and P. Dyhre-Poulsen.

“Neural Adaptation to Resistance Training: Changes in Evoked V-Wave and H-
Reflex Responses.” Journal of Applied Physiology 92 (2002): 2309-18.
Abbs, J. H., V. L. Gracco, and K. J. Cole. “Control of Multimovement Coordination:

Sensorimotor Mechanisms in Speech Motor Programming.” Journal of Motor
Behavior 16(2) (1984): 195-231.
Aboitiz, F. and R. Garcia. “The Anatomy of Language Revisited.” Biological Research

30(4) (1997): 171-83.
Ackerman, Phillip L. “Individual Differences in Skill Learning: An Integration of

Psychometric and Information Processing Perspectives.” Psychological Bulletin 102
(1987): 3-27.
________. “Determinants of Individual Differences During Skill Acquisition:

Cognitive Abilities and Information Processing.” Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General 117(3) (1988): 288-318.
Ackerman, P. L. and A. T. Cianciolo. “Cognitive, Perceptual-Speed, and Psychomotor

Determinants of Individual Differences During Skill Acquisition.” Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Applied 6 (2000): 259-90.
Adam, A., C. J. De Luca, and Z. Erim. “Hand Dominance and Motor Unit Firing
Behavior.” Journal of Neurophysiology 80 (1998): 1373-82.
Adams, J. A. “A Closed-loop Theory of Motor Learning.” Journal of Motor Behavior 9

(1971): 111-50.
________. “Learning of Movement Sequences.” Psychological Bulletin 96 (1984): 3-

28.
140
REFERENCES - Continued
________. “Use of the Model’s Knowledge of Results to Increase the Observer’s

Performance.” Journal of Human Movement Studies 12 (1986): 89-98.
________. “Historical Review and Appraisal of Research on the Learning, Retention,

and Transfer of Human Motor Skills.” Psychological Bulletin 101(1) (1987): 41-74.
Adams, J. A., D. Gopher, and G. Lintern. “Effects of Visual and Proprioceptive

Feedback on Motor Learning.” Journal of Motor Behavior 9 (1977): 11-22.
Adams, J. A., E. Goetz, and P. Marshall. “Response Feedback and Motor Learning.”
Journal of Experimental Psychology 92 (1972): 391-7.
Adams, J. A. and N. W. Bray. “A Closed-Loop Theory of Paired-Associate Verbal

Learning.” Psychological Review 77 (1970): 385-405.
Adams, G. R., R. T. Harris, D. Woodard, and G. Dudley. “Mapping of Electrical Muscle

Stimulation Using MRI.” Journal of Applied Physiology 74 (1993): 532-7.
Adkins, De Anna L., Jeffery Boychuk, Michael S. Rempe, and Jeffrey A. Kleim. “Motor
Training Induces Experience-Specific Patterns of Plasticity Across Motor Cortex and
Spinal Cord.” Journal of Applied Physiology 101: (2006): 1776-82.
Adrian, E. and D. Bronk. “The Discharge of Impulses in Motor Nerve Fibres. II. The
Frequency of Discharges in Reflex and Voluntary Contractions.” Journal of
Physiology 204 (1929): 231-57.
Aggleton, J. P., R. W. Kentridge, and J. M. M. Good. “Handedness and Musical Ability:

A Study of Professional Orchestral Players, Composers, and Choir Members.”
Psychology of Music 22 (1994): 148-56.
Akshoomoff, N. A., E. Courchesne, and J. Townsend. “Attention Coordination and

Anticipatory Control.” In The Cerebellum and Cognition, ed. J. D. Schmahmann,
575-98. New York: Academic Press, 1997.
Albus, J. S. “A Theory of Cerebellar Function.” Math Bioscience 10 (1971): 25-61.
Aleman, A., M. R. Nieuwenstein, K. B. E. Bocker, and H. F. de Hann. “Music Training

and Mental Imagery Ability.” Neuropsychologia 38 (2000): 1664-8.
Alessandri-Haber, N., G. Alcaraz, C. Deleuze, F. Jullien, C. Manrique, F. Couraud, M.

Crest, and P. Giraud. “Molecular Determinants of Emerging Excitability in Rat
Embryonic Motoneurons.” Journal of Physiology 541 (2002): 25-39.
141
Allen, G. M., S. C. Gandevia, and D. K. McKenzie. “Reliability of Measurements of

Muscle Strength and Voluntary Activation Using Twitch Interpolation.” Muscle &
Nerve 18 (1995): 593-600.
Allison, T., A. Puce, and G. McCarthy. “Social Perception from Visual Cues: Role of
the STS Region.” Trends in Cognitive Science 4 (2000): 267-78.
Allred, R. P. and T. A. Jones. “Unilateral Ischemic Sensorimotor Cortical Damage in

Female Rats: Forelimb Behavioral Effects and Dendritic Structural Plasticity in the
Contralateral Homotopic Cortex.” Experimental Neurology 190 (2004): 433-45.
Ammons, R. B., C. H. Ammons, and R. L. Morgan. “Transfer of Skill and Decremental

Factors Along the Speed Dimensions in Rotary Pursuit.” Perceptual and Motor Skills
6 (1956): 43.
Amunts, K., G. Schlaug, L. Jäncke, H. Steinmetz, A. Schleicher, A. Dabringhaus, and K.

Zilles. “Motor Cortex and Hand Motor Skills: Structural Compliance in the Human
Brain.” Human Brain Mapping 5 (1997): 206-15.
Anderson, J. R. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press, 1983.
________. Rules of Mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1993.
Annett, M. Left, Right, Hand and Brain: The Right Shift Theory. London: Erlbaum,
1985.
Aoki T., P. R. Francis, H. Kinoshita. “Differences in the Abilities of Individual Fingers

During the Performance of Fast, Repetitive Tapping Movements.” Experimental
Brain Research 152 (2003): 270-80.
Aoki T, S. Furuya, H. Kinoshita. “Finger-Tapping Ability in Male and Female Pianists

and Nonmusician Controls.” Motor Control 9(1) (2005): 23-39.
Argaw, A., P. Desaulniers, and P. F. Gardiner. “Enhanced Neuromuscular Transmission

Efficacy in Overloaded Rat Plantaris Muscle.” Muscle & Nerve 29 (2004): 97-103.
Aroniadou, V. A. and A. Keller. “Mechanisms of LTP Induction in Rat Motor Cortex In

Vitro.” Cerebral Cortex 5(4) (1995): 353-62.
Asanuma, H. and C. Pavlides. “Neurobiological Basis of Motor Learning in Mammals.”

NeuroReport 8(4) (1997): i-vi.
142
Atkeson, C. G. “Learning Arm Kinematics and Dynamics.” Annual Review of

Neuroscience 12 (1989): 157-83.
Au, Angelina Ngan-chu. “The Piano Etude in the Nineteenth Century: From the
Acquisition of Facility to Demonstration of Virtuosity.” D.M.A. diss., University of
Cincinnati, 1999.
Aziz-Zadeh, L., M. Iacoboni, E. Zaidel, S. Wilson, and J. Mazziotta. “Left Hemisphere

Motor Facilitation in Response to Manual Action Sounds.” European Journal of
Neuroscience 19 (2004): 2609-12.
Baddeley, A. and D. Longman. “The Influence of Length and Frequency of Training

Session on the Rate of Learning to Type.” Ergonomics 21 (1978): 627-35.
Baddeley, A. and R. Logie. “Auditory Imagery and Working Memory.” In Auditory

Imagery, ed. Daniel Reisberg, 201-35. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
1992.
Badura-Skoda, Paul. Preface to Etudes Op. 10, by Frédéric Chopin. Vienna: Wiener
Urtext Edition, 1973.
Bagesteiro, L. B., F. R. Sarlegna, and R. L. Sainburg. “Differential Influence of Vision

and Proprioception on Control of Movement Distance.” Experimental Brain Research
171(3) (May 2006): 358-70.
Baldissera, F., P. Cavallari, G. Marini, and G. Tassone. “Differential Control of In-Phase

and Anti-Phase Coupling of Rhythmic Movements of Ipsilateral Hand and Foot.”
Baltes, P. B. and R. Kliegl. “Further Testing of Limits of Cognitive Plasticity: Negative

Age Differences in a Mnemonic Skill are Robust.” Developmental Psychology 28
(1992): 121-5.
Bandura, A., ed. Psychological Modeling. New York: Lieber-Atherton, 1971.
Bangert, M. and E. O. Altenmüller. “Mapping Perception to Action in Piano Practice: A

Longitudinal DC-EEG Study.” BMC Neuroscience 4(26) (2003),
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/4/26.
143
Bangert, M., T. Peschel, G. Schlaug, M. Rotte, D. Drescher, H. Hinrichs, H. J. Heinze,

and E. Altenmüller. “Shared Networks for Auditory and Motor Processing in
Professional Pianists: Evidence from fMRI Conjunction.” NeuroImage 30 (2006):
917-26.
Bangert, M., U. Haeusler, and E. Altenmüller. “On Practice: How the Brain Connects
Piano Keys and Piano Sounds.” Biological Foundations of Music 930 (2001): 425-8.
Banton, L. “The Role of Visual and Auditory Feedback During the Sight-Reading of
Music.” Psychology of Music 23 (1995): 3-16.
Bashaw, Donna R. “The Evolution of Philosophies and Techniques of Piano Pedagogy

from 1750 to 1900 Traced Through the Teachings of C. P. E. Bach, Clementi, Czerny,
Chopin, and Leschetizky.” M.A. Thesis, California State University, Fullerton, 1980.
Baumann, S., S. Koeneke, C. F. Schmidt, M. Meyer, K. Lutz, and L. Jäncke. “A

Network for Sensory-Motor Integration: What Happens in the Auditory Cortex
During Piano Playing Without Acoustic Feedback?” Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences 1060 (2005): 186-88.
________. “A Network for Audio-Motor Coordination in Skilled Pianists and Non-

Musicians.” Brain Research 1161 (August 2007): 65-78.
Baumeister, R. F. “Choking Under Pressure: Self-Consciousness and Paradoxical

Effects of Incentives on Skillful Performance.” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 46 (1984): 610-20.
Beaumont, E., J. D. Houlé, C. A. Peterson, and P. F. Gardiner. “Passive Exercise and

Fetal Spinal Cord Transplant Both Help to Restore Motoneuronal Properties After
Spinal Cord Transection in Rats.” Muscle & Nerve 29 (2004): 234-42.
Beek, P. J., C. E. Peper, and A. Daffertshofer. “Modeling Rhythmic Interlimb

Coordination: Beyond the Kahen-Kelso-Bunz Model.” Brain and Cognition 48
(2002): 149-65.
Beilock, S. L., S. A. Wierenga, and T. H. Carr. “Expertise, Attention, and Memory in

Sensorimotor Skill Execution: Impact of Novel Task Constraints on Dual-Task
Performance and Episodic Memory.” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 55(4) (2002): 1211-40.
144
________. “When Paying Attention Becomes Counterproductive: Impact of Divided

Versus Skill-Focused Attention on Novice and Experienced Performance of
Sensorimotor Skills.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 8(1) (2002): 6-
16.
________. “Memory and Expertise: What Do Experienced Athletes Remember?” In

Expert Performance in Sports: Advances in Research on Sport Expertise, ed. Janet L.
Starkes and K. Anders Ericsson, 295-320. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2003.
Beilock, S. L. and T. H. Carr. “On the Fragility of Skilled Performance: What Governs
Choking Under Pressure?” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 130
(2001): 701-25.
Beisteiner, R., E. Altenmüller, W. Lang, G. Lindinger, and L. Decke. “Musicians

Processing Music: Measurement of Brain Potentials with EEG.” European Journal
of Psychology 6 (1994): 311-27.
Belanger, A. Y. and A. J. McComas. “Extent of Motor Unit Activation During Effort.”

Journal of Applied Physiology 51 (1981): 381-93.
Bellemare, F., J. J. Woods, R. S. Johansson, and B. Bigland-Ritchie. “Motor-Unit

Discharge Rates During Maximal Voluntary Contractions of Three Human Muscles.”
Bentovoglio, M., K. Kultas-Llinsky, and I. Llinsky. “Limbic Thalamus: Structure,

Intrinsic Organization, and Connections.” In Neurobiology of Cingulate Cortex and
Limbic Thalamus, ed. B. A. Vogt and M. Gabriel, 71-122. Boston: Birkhauser, 1993.
Bernardi, M., M. Solomonow, G. Nguyen, A. Smith, and R. Baratta. “Motor Unit

Recruitment Strategy Changes with Skill Acquisition.” European Journal of Applied
Physiology 74 (1996): 52-9.
Bernstein, N. The Coordination and Regulation of Movements. London: Pergamon,

1967.
Besson, M. and D. Schön. “Comparison Between Language and Music.” Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences 930 (2001): 232-58.
Bihan, D. L., R. Turner, T. A. Zeffiro, C. A. Cuenod, P. Jezzard, and V. Bonnerat.

“Activation of Human Primary Visual Cortex During Visual Recall: A Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Study.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 90
(1993): 11802-5.
145
Bilodeau, I. M. “Information Feedback.” In Acquisition of Skill, ed. E. A. Bilodeau, 255-

96. New York: Academic Press: 1966.
Binkofski, F. and G. Buccino. “Motor Functions of the Broca’s Region.” Brain and
Language 89 (2004): 362-9.
________. “The Role of Ventral Premotor Cortex in Action

Execution and Action Understanding.” Journal of Physiology (Paris) 99 (2006): 396-
405.
Black, J. W. “The Effect of Delayed Side-Tone Upon Vocal Rate and Intensity.”
Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders 16 (1951): 56-60.
Bogacz, Sally. “Understanding How Speed Affects Performance of Polyrhythms:

Transferring Control as Speed Increases.” Journal of Motor Behavior 37(1) (2005):
21-34.
Bonaiuto, James, Edina Rosta, and Michael Arbib. “Extending the Mirror Neuron
System Model, I: Audible Actions and Invisible Grasps.” Biological Cybernetics 96
(2007): 9-38.
Borden, G. J. “An Interpretation of Research on Feedback Interruption in Speech.”

Brain & Language 7 (1979): 307-19.
Boron, Walter F. and Emile L. Boulpaep. Medical Physiology: A Cellular and

Molecular Approach. China: Elsevier Science, 2003.
Bouisset, S. and M. Zattara. “A Sequence of Postural Movements Precedes Voluntary

Movement.” Neuroscience Letters 22 (1981): 263-70.
Bower, G. H. and E. R. Hilgard. Theories of Learning, 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1981.
Bower, J. M. “Control of Sensory Data Acquisition.” In The Cerebellum and Cognition,

ed. J. D. Schmahmann, 490-513. New York: Academic Press, 1997.
Bower, J. M. and L. M. Parsons. “Rethinking the Lesser Brain.” Scientific American 289
(2003): 50-7.
Brass, M., H. Bekkering, A. Wohlschlager, and W. Prinz. “Compatibility Between

Observed and Execute Finger Movements: Comparing Symbolic, Spatial, and
Imitative Cues.” Brain Cognition 44 (2000): 124-43.
146
Bray, C. W. “Transfer of Learning.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 11 (1928):

443-67.
Bressler, S. L. and J. A. S. Kelso. “Cortical Coordination Dynamics and Cognition.”

Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (2001): 26-36.
Brodsky, Warren, Avishai Henik, Bat-Sheva Rubinstein, and Moshe Zorman. “Inner
Hearing Among Symphony Orchestra Musicians: Intersectional Differences of
String-Players Versus Wind-Players.” In Music, Mind, and Science, ed. Suk Won Yi,
374-96. Seoul: Seoul National University, Western Music Research Institute, 1999.
________. “Auditory Imagery from Musical Notation in Expert Musicians.” Perception

& Psychophysics 65(4) (2003): 602-12.
Brown, S., M. J. Martinez, D. A. Hodges, P. T. Fox, and L. M. Parsons. “The Song

System of the Human Brain.” Cognitive Brain Research 20(3) (2004): 363-7.
Bryan, William Lowe and Noble Harter. “Studies in the Physiology and Psychology of
the Telegraphic Language.” Psychological Review 4 (1897): 27-53.
________. “Studies on the Telegraphic Language: The Acquisition of a Hierarchy of

Habits.” Psychological Review 6(4) (1899): 345-75.
Bryson, A. E. and Y. C. Ho. Applied Optimal Control. New York: Halsted Press, 1975.
Buccino, G., F. Binkofski, G. R. Fink, L. Fadiga, L. Fogassi, V. Gallese, R. J. Seitz, K.

Zilles, G. Rizzolatti, and H. J. Freund. “Action Observation Activates Premotor and
Parietal Areas in a Somatotopic Manner: An fMRI Study.” European Journal of
Neuroscience 13(2) (2001): 400-4.
Buccino, G., F. Binkofski, and L. Riggio. “The Mirror Neuron System and Action
Recognition.” Brain and Language 89(2) (2004a): 362-9.
Buccino, G., S. Vogt, A. Ritzl, G. R. Fink, K. Zilles, H. J. Freund, and G. Rizzolatti.

“Neural Circuits Underlying Imitation Learning of Hand Actions: An Event-Related
fMRI Study.” Neuron 42 (2004b): 323-34.
Burns, E. M. and W. D. Ward. “Categorical Perception – Phenomenon or

Epiphenomenon: Evidence From Experiments in the Perception of Melodic Musical
Intervals.” Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 53 (1978): 456-68.
147
Bury, D. and T. A. Jones. “Unilateral Sensorimotor Cortex Lesions in Adult Rats

Facilitate Motor Skill Learning with the ‘Unaffected’ Forelimb and Training-Induced
Dendritic Structural Plasticity in the Motor Cortex.” Journal of Neuroscience 22
(2002): 8597-8606.
Byblow, W. D., D. Bysouth-Young, J. J. Summers, and R. G. Carson. “Performance

Asymmetries and Coupling Dynamics in the Acquisition of Multifrequency Bimanual
Coordination.” Psychological Research 61 (1998): 56-70.
Byrne, B. “Handedness and Musical Ability.” British Journal of Psychology 65 (1974):

279-81.
Campbell, M. J., A. J. McComas, and F. Petito. “Physiological Changes in Ageing

Muscle.” Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 36 (1973): 174–82.
Campos, G. E., T. J. Luecke, H. K. Wendeln, K. Toma, F. C. Hagerman, T. F. Murray, K.

E. Ragg, N. A. Ratamess, W. J. Kraemer, and R. S. Staron. “Muscular Adaptations in
Response to Three Different Resistance-Training Regimens: Specificity of Repetition
Maximum Training Zones.” European Journal of Applied Physiology 88 (2002): 50-
60.
Carmichael, S. T. and J. L. Price. “Limbic Connections of the Orbital and Medial

Prefrontal Cortex in Macaque Monkeys.” Journal of Comparative Neurology 363
(1995): 615-41.
Carp, J. S. and J. R. Wolpaw. “Motoneuron Plasticity Underlying Operantly Conditioned

Decrease in Primate H-Reflex.” Journal of Neurophysiology 72 (1994): 431-42.
________. “Motoneuron Properties After Operantly Conditioned

Increase in Primate H-Reflex.” Journal of Neurophysiology 73 (1995): 1365-73.
Carp, J. S., X. Y. Chen, H. Sheikh, and J. R. Wolpaw. “Operant Conditioning of Rat H-

Reflex Affects Motoneuron Axonal Conduction Velocity.” Experimental Brain
Research 136 (2001): 269-73.
Carpenter, A. F., A. P. Georgopoulos, and G. Pellizzer. “Motor Control Encoding

of Serial Order in a Context-Recall Task.” Science 283 (1999): 1752-7.
Carroll, Timothy J., Stephan Riek, and Richard G. Carson. “Neural Adaptations to
Resistance Training.” Sports Medicine 31(12) (2001): 829-40.
148
Carson, R. G. “The Dynamics of Isometric Bimanual Coordination.” Experimental

Brain Research 105 (1995): 465–76.
Catmur, C., V. Walsh, and C. Heyes. “Sensorimotor Learning Configures the Human
Mirror System.” Current Biology 17(17) (2007): 1527-31.
Cattaert, D., A. Semjen, and J. J. Summers. “Simulating a Neural Cross-Talk Model for
Between-Hand Interference During Bimanual Circle Drawing.” Biological
Cybernetics 81 (1999): 343-58.
Ceci, S. and W. Williams. The Nature-Nurture Debate: The Essential Readings. New
York: Blackwell Publishing Co., 2000.
Chan, T. “An Investigation of Finger and Manual Dexterity.” Perceptual and Motor
Skills 90 (2000): 537-42.
Chase, R. A. “An Information-Flow Model of the Organization of Motor Activity. I:

Transduction, Transmission and Central Control of Sensory Information.” Journal of
Nervous & Mental Disease 140 (1965): 239-51.
Chase, W. G. and H. A. Simon. “Perception in Chess.” Cognitive Psychology 4 (1973):

55-81.
Chen, X. Y., L. Chen, and J. R. Wolpaw. “Time Course of H-Reflex Conditioning in the
Rat.” Neuroscience Letters 302 (2001): 85-8.
Chi, M. T. H., R. Glaser, and M. J. Farr, ed. The Nature of Expertise. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum, 1988.
Chiang, H., S. M. Slobounov, and W. Ray. “Practice-Related Modulations of Force

Enslaving and Cortical Activity as Revealed by EEG.” Clinical Neurophysiology 115
(2004): 1033-43.
Chopin, Frédéric. Études. Edited by James Huneker and Carl Mikuli. Fingered with
Introductory Material by Carl Mikuli. New York: G Schirmer, 1943.
________. Projet de Méthode. Quoted in Jean-Jacques Eigeldinger, Chopin: Pianist

and Teacher as Seen By His Pupils, ed. Roy Howat. Translated by Naomi Shohet
with Krysia Osostowicz and Roy Howat. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986.
149
________. 12 Studies, Op. 10. Student’s Edition by Alfred Cortot, Translated by

M. Parkinson. Paris: Salabert, 2003.
________. 12 Studies, Op. 25. Student’s Edition by Alfred Cortot, Translated by M.

Parkinson. Paris: Salabert, 2003.
Christman, Stephen. “Handedness in Musicians: Bimanual Constraints on

Performance.” Brain and Cognition 22 (1993): 266-72.
Christou, E. A., M. Grossman, and L. G. Carlton. “Modeling Variability of Force During

Isometric Quadriceps Femoris Muscle Contractions.” Journal of Motor Behavior 34
(2002): 67-81.
Christou, E. A., M. Zelent, and L. G. Carlton. “Force Control is Greater in Upper

Compared with the Lower Extremity.” Journal of Motor Behavior 35 (2003): 322-4.
Cisek, P. and J. F. Kalaska. “Neural Correlates of Mental Rehearsal in Dorsal Premotor

Cortex.” Nature 431 (2004): 993-6.
Classen, J., J. Liepert, S. P. Wise, M. Hallett, and L. G. Cohen. “Rapid Plasticity of

Human Cortical Movement Representation Induced by Practice.” Journal of
Neurophysiology 79(2) (1998): 1117-23.
Classen, J., U. Knorr, K. J. Werhahn, G. Schlaug, E. Kunesch, L. G. Cohen, R. J. Seitz,

and R. Benecke. “Multimodal Output Mapping of Human Central Motor
Representation on Different Spatial Scales.” Journal of Physiology 512 (1998): 163-
79.
Clinchard, Pauline Marie. “A Study and Analysis of Selected Etudes of Frederic Chopin
with Implications for Teaching and Performance.” Edcat D., diss., Columbia
University, 1972.
Coghlan, A. “Elite Athletes Born to Run.” New Scientist 30 (2003): 4-5.
Cohen, D. A., A. Pascual-Leone, D. Z. Press, and E. M. Robertson. “Off-Line Learning

of Motor Skill Memory: A Double Dissociation of Goal and Movement.”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
102(50) (2005): 18237-41.
Cohen, D. A. and E. M. Robertson. “Motor Sequence Consolidation: Constrained by

Critical Time Windows or Competing Components.” Experimental Research 177
(2007): 440-46.
150
Cohen, L. “Synchronous Bimanual Movements Performed by Homologous and Non-

Homologous Muscles.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 32 (1971): 639-44.
Colvin, S. S. and E. J. Myers. “The Development of Imagination in School Children and

the Relation Between Ideational Types and the Retentivity of Material Appealing to
Various Sense Departments.” Review Monographs 11 (1909): 85-125.
Conditt, M. A., F. Gandolfo, and F. A. Mussa-Ivaldi. “The Motor System Does Not
Learn the Dynamics of the Arm by Rote Memorization of Past Experience.” Journal
of Neurophysiology 78 (1997): 544-60.
Connors, B. W. C. E. Landisman, and R. C. Reid. “Thalamus: Organization and

Function.” Trends in Neurosciences 21 (1998): 539-40.
Cook, T. W. “Studies in Cross Education: III. Kinesthetic Learning of an Irregular

Pattern.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 17 (1934): 749-62.
Corbin, C. B. “Effects of Mental Practice on Skill Development after Controlled

Practice.” Research Quarterly 38 (1967): 534-8.
________. “Mental Practice.” In Ergogenic Aids and Muscular Performance, ed. W.

P. Morgan, 93-118. New York: Academic Press, 1972.
Cordo, P. J. and M. Flanders. “Sensory Control of Target Acquisition.” Trends in

Neurosciences 12 (1989): 110-7.
Cortot, Alfred. In Search of Chopin. Trans. Cyril and Rena Clarke. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 1975.
Craighero, L., A. Bello, L. Fadiga, and G. Rizzolatti. “Hand Action Preparation

Influences the Responses to Hand Pictures.” Neuropsychologia 40 (2002): 492-502.
Craighero, L., G. Metta, G. Sandini, and L. Fadiga. “The Mirror-Neurons System: Data
and Models.” Progress in Brain Research 163 (2007): 39-59.
Crammond, D. J. and J. F. Kalaska. “Differential Relation of Discharge in Primary

Motor Cortex and Premotor Cortex to Movement Versus Actively Maintained
Postures During a Reaching Task.” Experimental Brain Research 108 (1996): 45-61.
Crossman, E. R. F. W. “A Theory of the Acquisition of Speed-Skill.” Ergonomics 2

(1959): 153-66.
151
Darian-Smith, I., M. P. Galea, and C. Darian-Smith. “Manual Dexterity: How Does the
Cerebral Cortex Contribute?” Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and
Physiology 23 (1996): 948-56.
D’Ausiolio, A., E. Altenmüller, M. Olivetti Belardinelli, and M. Lotze. “Cross-Modal

Plasticity of the Motor Cortex While Listening to a Rehearsed Musical Piece.”
Davids, K. and J. Baker. “Genes, Environment and Sport Performance: Why the Nature-
Nurture Dualism is No Longer Relevant.” Sports Medicine 37(11) (2007): 961-80.
Davidson, Paul R. and Daniel M. Wolpert. “Widespread Access to Predictive Models in

the Motor System: A Short Review.” Journal of Neural Engineering 2 (2005):
S313-S319.
Debaere, F., N. Wenderoth, S. Sunaert, P. Van Hecke, and S. P. Swinnen. “Internal vs

External Generation of Movements: Differential Neural Pathways Involved in
Bimanual Coordination Performed in the Presence or Absence of Augmented Visual
Feedback.” NeuroImage 19 (2003): 764-76.
Decety, J. “The Neurophysiological Basis of Motor Imagery.” Behavioral Brain

Research 77 (1996): 45-52.
Decety, J. and J. Grèzes. “Neural Mechanisms Subserving the Perception of Human

Actions.” Trends in Cognitive Science 3(5) (1999): 172-8.
Decety, J., M. Jeannerod, M. Germain, and J. Pastene. “Vegetative Response During

Imagined Movement is Proportional to Imagined Effort.” Behavioural Brain
Research 42 (1991): 1-5.
________. “Central Activation of Autonomic Effectors During Mental Simulation of

Motor Actions in Man.” Journal of Physiology (London) 461 (1993): 549-63.
de Groot, A. Thought and Choice in Chess. The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton, 1978.
Dell’Aqua, R. and P. Jolicoeur. “Visual Encoding of Patterns is Subject to Dual-Task

Interference.” Memory & Cognition 28(2) (2000): 184-91.
De Luca, C. J., R. S., LeFever, M. P., McCue, and A. P. Xenakis. “Behavior of Human
Motor Units in Different Muscles During Linearly Varying Contractions.” Journal of
Physiology (London) 329 (1982): 113-28.
152
de Oliveira, Simone Cardoso. “The Neuronal Basis of Bimanual Coordination: Recent

Neurophysiological Evidence and Functional Models.” Acta Psychologica 110
(2002): 139-59.
Desaulniers, P., P. A. Lavoie, and P. F. Gardiner. “Habitual Exercise Enhances

Neuromuscular Transmission Efficacy of Rat Soleus Muscle in Situ.” Journal of
Applied Physiology 90 (2001): 1041-8.
Desmurget, M. and S. Grafton. “Forward Modeling Allows Feedback Control for Fast
Reaching Movements.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (2000): 423-31.
Deutsch, D. “The Generation of Two Isochronous Sequences in Parallel.” Perception &

Psychophysics 34(4) (1983): 331-37.
Deutsch, D. and J. R. Pierce. “The Climate of Auditory Imagery and Music.” In

Auditory Imagery, ed. Daniel Reisberg, 237-60. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, 1992.
de Vries, Sjoerd and Theo Mulder. “Motor Imagery and Stroke Rehabilitation: A
Critical Discussion.” Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 39 (2007): 5-13.
di Pellegrino, G., L. Fadiga, L. Fogassi, V. Gallese, and G. Rizzolatti. “Understanding

Motor Events: A Neurophysiological Study.” Experimental Brain Research 91
(1992): 176-80.
Dodge, K. A. “The Nature-Nurture Debate and Public Policy.” Merrill-Palmer

Quarterly 50 (2004): 418-27.
Donoghue, J. P. and S. P. Wise. “The Motor Cortex of the Rat: Cytoarchitecture and
Microstimulation Mapping.” The Journal of Comparative Neurology 212 (1982): 76-
88.
Dorlöchter, M., A. Irintchev, M. Brinkers, and A. Wernig. “Effects of Enhanced Activity

on Synaptic Transmission in Mouse Extensor Digitorum Longus Muscle.” Journal of
Physiology 436 (1991): 283-92.
Doupe, A. J. and P. K. Kuhl. “Birdsong and Human Speech: Common Themes and
Mechanisms.” Annual Review of Neuroscience 22 (1999): 567-31.
Dowling, J. J., E. Konert, P. Ljucovic, and D. M. Andrews. “Are Humans Able to

Voluntarily Elicit Maximum Muscle Force?” Neuroscience Letters 1994 (179): 25-8.
153
Doya, K. “What are the Computations of Cerebellum, Basal Ganglia, and Cerebral
Cortex?” Neural Networks 12 (1999): 961-74.
________. “Complementary Roles of Basal Ganglia and Cerebellum in Learning and

Motor Control.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 10 (2000): 732-9.
Doyen, A. L. and M. Carlier. “Measuring Handedness: A Validation Study of Bishop’s

Reading Card Test.” Laterality 7 (2002): 115-30.
Drake, Carolyn and Caroline Palmer. “Skill Acquisition in Music Performance:

Relations Between Planning and Temporal Control.” Cognition 74 (2000): 1-32.
Driskell, J., C. Copper, and A. Moran. “Does Mental Practice Enhance Performance?”
Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4) (1994): 481-92.
Duchateau, J., J. G. Semmler, and R. M. Enoka. “Training Adaptations in the Behavior

of Human Motor Units.” Journal of Applied Physiology 101 (2006): 1766-75.
Duchateau, J. and K. Hainaut. “Isometric or Dynamic Training: Differential Effects on

Mechanical Properties of a Human Muscle.” Journal of Applied Physiology 56(2)
(1984): 296-301.
Duhamel, J. R., C. L. Colby, and M. E. Goldberg. “Ventral Intraparietal Area of the

Macaque: Congruent Visual and Somatic Response Properties.” Journal of
Dunham, P. “Effect of Bilateral Transfer on Coincidence/Anticipation Performance.”

Research Quarterly 48 (1977): 51-5.
Dvorak, A., N. L. Merrick, W. L. Dealey, and G. C. Ford. Typewriting Behavior. New

York: American Book, 1936.
Edelman, G. M. and J. A. Gally. “Degeneracy and Complexity in Biological Systems.”

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98
(2001): 13763-8.
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. “The Expressive Behavior of the Deaf-and-Blind-Born.” In Social

Communication and Movement: Studies of Interaction and Expression in Man and
Chimpanzee, ed. M.V. Cranach and I. Vine, 163-94. London: Academic Press, 1973.
154
Eigeldinger, Jean-Jacques. Chopin: Pianist and Teacher as Seen by His Pupils.

Translated by Naomi Shohet with Hrysia Osostowica and Roy Howatt. Edited by Roy
Howatt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
Einstein, Alfred. Music in the Romantic Era. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc.,
1947.
Elbert, T., C. Pantev, C. Wienbruch, B. Rockstroh, and E. Taub. “Increased Cortical

Representation of the Fingers of the Left Hand in String Players.” Science 270
(1995): 305-7.
Eliassen, J. C., K. Baynes, and M. S. Gazzaniga. “Direction Information Coordinated

Via the Posterior Third of the Corpus Callosum During Bimanual Movements.”
________. “Anterior and Posterior Callosal Contributions to Simultaneous Bimanual

Movements of the Hands and Fingers.” Brain 123 (2000): 2501-11.
Elliot, D., and M. Jaeger. “Practice and the Visual Control of Manual Aiming
Movements.” Journal of Human Movement Studies, 14 (1988): 279-91.
Engel, K. C., M. Flanders, and J. F. Soechting. “Anticipatory and Sequential Motor

Control in Piano Playing.” Experimental Brain Research 113 (1997): 189-99.
Enoka, R. M. “Muscle Strength and its Development: New Perspectives.” Sports

Medicine 6 (1988): 146-68.
________. “Neural Adaptations with Chronic Physical Activity.” Journal of

Biomechanics 30(5) (1997): 448.
Enoka, R. M. and A. J. Fuglevand. “Neuromuscular Basis of the Maximum Voluntary

Force Capacity of Muscle.” In Current Issues in Biomechanics, ed. M. D. Grabiner,
215-35. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1993.
Ericsson, K. A. “Memory Skill.” Canadian Journal of Psychology 39 (1985): 188-231.
________. “Analysis of Memory Performance in Terms of Memory Skill.” In

Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, 4th ed., ed. R. J. Sternberg, 137-
79. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988.
155
________. “Development of Elite Performance and Deliberate Practice: An Update

From the Perspective of the Expert Performance Approach.” In Expert Performance
in Sports: Advances in Research on Sport Expertise, ed. Janet L. Starkes and K.
Anders Ericsson, 49-83. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2003.
Ericsson, K. A. and J. Smith. “Prospects and Limits of the Empirical Study of Expertise:
An Introduction.” In Toward a General Theory of Expertise: Prospects and Limits,
ed. K. A. Ericsson and J. Smith, 1-39. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press, 1991b.
Ericsson, K. A. and J. Smith, ed. Toward a General Theory of Expertise: Prospects and
Limits. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991a.
Ericsson, K. A., Ralph Th. Krampe, and Clements Tesch-Römer. “The Role of
Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance.” Psychological Review
100(3) (1993): 363-406.
Erim, Z., C. J. De Luca, K. Mineo, and T. Aoki. “Rank-Ordered Regulation of Motor

Units.” Muscle & Nerve 19 (1996): 563-73.
Fadiga, L., L. Craighero, G. Buccino, and G. Rizzolatti. “Speech Listening Specifically

Modulates the Excitability of Tongue Muscles: A TMS Study.” European Journal of
Neuroscience 15 (2002): 399-402.
Fahrer, M. “Interdependent and Independent Actions of the Fingers.” In The Hand , ed.
R. Tubania, pp. 399-403. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1981.
Faillenot, I., I. Toni, J. Decety, M. C. Gregoire, and M. Jeannerod. “Visual Pathways for
Object-Oriented Action and Object Recognition, Functional Anatomy with PET.”
Cerebral Cortex 7 (1997): 77-85.
Fairbanks, G. “Systematic Research in Experimental Phonetics: 1. A Theory of the

Speech Mechanism as a Servosystem.” Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 19
(1954): 133-39.
Fairbanks, G. and N. Guttman. “Effects of Delayed Auditory Feedback Upon

Articulation.” Journal of Speech & Hearing Research 1 (1958): 12-22.
Farah, M. J. “The Neural Bases of Mental Imagery.” In The New Cognitive

Neurosciences, ed. M.S. Gazzaniga, 965-74. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.
156
Farah, M. J. and A. F. Smith. “Perceptual Interference and Facilitation with Auditory

Imagery.” Perception & Psychophysics 33 (1983): 475-8.
Faulkner, J. A. and S. V. Brooks. “Muscle Fatigue in Old Animals. Unique Aspects of

Fatigue in Elderly Humans.” Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 384
(1995): 471-80.
Favilla M., W. Hening, and C. Ghez. “Trajectory Control in Targeted Force Impulses.
VI. Independent Specification of Response Amplitude and Direction.” Experimental
Brain Research 75 (1989): 280-94.
Feltz, D. L. and D. M. Landers. “The Effects of Mental Practice on Motor Skill Learning
and Performance: A Meta-analysis.” Journal of Sports Psychology 5 (1983): 25-7.
Feng-Chen, K. C. and J. R. Wolpaw. “Operant Conditioning of H-Reflex Changes

Synaptic Terminals on Primate Motoneurons.” Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America 93 (1996): 9206-11.
Fentress, J. C. “Development of Grooming in Mice with Amputated Forelimbs.”

Science 179(74) (1973): 704-5.
Fiez, J. A., S. E. Petersen, M. K. Cheney, and M. E. Raichie. “Impaired Nonmotor

Learning and Error-Detection Associated with Cerebellar Damage—A Single Case
Study.” Brain 115 (1992): 155-78.
Filimon, Flavia, Jonathan D. Nelson, Donald J. Hagler, and Martin I. Sereno. “Human
Cortical Representations for Reaching: Mirror Neurons for Execution, Observation,
and Imagery.” NeuroImage 37(4) (2007): 1315-28.
Finke, R. A. Principles of Mental Imagery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989.
Finlow, Simon. “The Twenty-Seven Etudes and Their Antecedents.” In The Cambridge
Companion to Chopin, ed. Jim Samson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1992.
Finney, Steven A. “Auditory Feedback and Musical Keyboard Performance.” Music

Perception 15 (1997): 153-74.
Finney, Steven A. and Caroline Palmer. “Auditory Feedback and Memory for Music
Performance: Sound Evidence for an Encoding Effect.” Memory & Cognition 31(1)
(2003): 51-64.
157
Fish J., J. F. Soechting. “Synergistic Finger Movements in a Skilled Motor Task.”

Fisk, A. D. and W. Schneider. “Memory as a Function of Attention, Level of Processing,

and Automatization.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition 10 (1984): 181-97.
Fitts, P. “Perceptual-Motor Skill Learning.” In Categories of Human Learning, ed. A.

W. Melton, 243-85. New York: Academic Press, 1964.
Fitts, P. and M. I. Posner. Human Performance. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1967.
Fitts, R. H. and J. J. Widrick. “Muscle Mechanics: Adaptations with Exercise-Training.”

Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews 24 (1996): 427-73.
Flanagan, J. R. and A. M. Wing. “The Role of Internal Models in Motion Planning and
Control: Evidence from Grip Force Adjustments During Movements of Hand-Held
Loads.” Journal of Neuroscience 17(4) (1997): 1519-28.
Flanagan J. R., P. Vetter, R. S. Johansson, and D. M. Wolpert. “Prediction Precedes

Control in Motor Learning.” Current Biology 13 (2003): 146-150.
Franz, E. A. “Spatial Coupling in the Coordination of Complex Actions.” Quarterly

Journal of Experimental Psychology A50 (1997): 684–704.
Franz, E. A., H. N. Zelaznik, S. P. Swinnen, and C. B. Walter. “Spatial Conceptual

Influences on the Coordination of Bimanual Actions: When a Dual Task Becomes a
Single Task.” Journal of Motor Behavior 33 (2001): 103-12.
Franz, E. A., J. C. Eliassen, R. B. Ivry, and M. S. Gazzaniga. “Dissociation of Spatial

and Temporal Coupling in the Bimanual Movements of Callosotomy Patients.”
Psychological Science 7 (1996): 306-10.
Franz, E. A. and V. S. Ramachandran. “Bimanual Coupling in Amputees with Phantom

Limbs.” Nature Neuroscience 1(6) (1998): 443-4.
Freund, H. J., H. J. Büdingen, and V. Dietz. “Activity of Single Motor Units from
Human Forearm Muscles During Voluntary Isometric Contractions.” Journal of
158
Fuchs, A., V. K. Jirsa, H. Haken, and J. A. Kelso. “Extending the HKB Model of
Coordinated Movement to Oscillators with Different Eigenfrequencies.” Biological
Cybernetics 74 (1996): 21-30.
Gaab, N., C. Gaser, T. Zaehle, L. Jäncke, and G. Schlaug. “Functional Anatomy of Pitch
Memory—An fMRI Study with Sparse Temporal Sampling.” NeuroImage 19 (2003):
1417-26.
Gabriel, D., G. Kamen, and G. Frost. “Neural Adaptations to Resistive Exercise:

Mechanisms and Recommendations for Training Practices.” Sports Medicine 36 (2):
133-49.
Gabrielsson, A. “The Performance of Music.” In The Psychology of Music, 2nd ed., ed.
D. Deutsch, 501-602. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999.
Gagné, R. M. The Conditions of Learning, 2nd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
1970.
Galganski, M. E., A. J. Fuglevand, and R. M. Enoka. “Reduced Control of Motor Output

in a Human Hand Muscle of Elderly Subjects During Submaximal Contractions.”
Journal of Neurophysiology 69 (1993): 2108–15.
Gallese, V., L. Fadiga, L. Fogassi, and G. Rizzolatti. “Action Recognition in the

Premotor Cortex.” Brain 119 (1996): 593-609.
Galton, F. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry Into its Laws and Consequences. New York:
Horizon Press, 1952.
Gandevia, S. “Spinal and Supraspinal Factors in Human Muscle Fatigue.” Physiological

Reviews 2001 (81): 1725-89.
Ganz, Peter Felix. “The Development of the Etude for Pianoforte.” Ph. D. diss.,
Northwestern University, 1960.
Gardiner, P., Y. Dai, and C. J. Heckman. “Effects of Exercise Training on α-

Motoneurons.” Journal of Applied Physiology 101 (2006): 1228-36.
Gates, A. and J. Bradshaw. “Effects of Auditory Feedback on a Musical Performance

Task.” Perception & Psychophysics, 16 (1974): 105-9.
Gauthier, G. M. and J. M. Hofferer. “Eye Tracking of Self-Moved Targets in Absence of

Vision.” Experimental Brain Research 26 (1976): 121-39.
159
Georgopoulos, A. P. “Population Activity in the Control of Movement.” International

Review of Neurobiology 37 (1994): 103-19.
________. “Current Issues in Directional Motor Control.” Trends in Neuroscience 18

(1995): 506-10.
________. “Arm Movements in Monkeys: Behavior and Neurophysiology.”

Journal of Comparative Physiology [A] 179 (1996): 603-12.
________. “Neural Aspects of Cognitive Motor Control.” Current Opinions in

Neurobiology 10 (2000): 238-41.
Gerardin, E., A. Sirigu, S. Lehéricy, J. B. Poline, B. Gaymard, C. Marsault, Y. Agid, and

D. Le Bihan. “Partially Overlapping Neural Networks for Real and Imagined Hand
Movements.” Cerebral Cortex 10(11) (2000): 1093-1104.
Gerloff C., B. Corwell, R. Chen, M. Hallett, and L. G. Cohen. “The Role of the Human
Motor Cortex in the Control of Complex and Simple Finger Movement Sequences.”
Brain 121 (1998): 1695-1709.
Ghez, C., M. Favilla, M. F. Ghilardi, J. Gordon, R. Bermejo, and S. Pullman. “Discrete

and Continuous Planning of Hand Movements and Isometric Force Trajectories.”
Ghez, C., W. Hening, and J. Gordon. “Organization of Voluntary Movement.” Current

Opinion in Neurobiology 1 (1991): 664-71.
Gibson, E. J. Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice Hall, 1969.
Gilbert, A. N. and C. J. Wysocki. “Hand Preference and Age in the United States.”
Glasauer, S. “Cerebellar Contribution to Saccades and Gaze Holding: A Modeling

Approach.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1004 (2003): 206-19.
Gordon, A. M., G. Westling, K. J. Cole, and R. S. Johansson. “Memory Representations

Underlying Motor Commands Used During Manipulation of Common and Novel
Objects.” Journal of Neurophysiology 69 (1993): 1789-96.
160
Gordon, A. M., H. Forssberg, and N. Iwasaki. “Formation and Lateralization of Internal

Representations Underlying Motor Commands During Precision Grip.”
Gordon, A. M., H. Forssberg, R. S. Johansson, and G. Westling. “Visual Size Cues in the
Programming of Manipulative Forces During Precision Grip.” Experimental Brain
Research 83 (1991): 477-82.
Gordon, E. E. Learning Sequences in Music: Skill, Content, and Pattern. A Music

Learning Theory, 4th ed. Chicago: GIA, 1993.
________. Learning Theory, Patterns, and Music. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets &
Zeitlinger, 2001.
Gordon, J. and C. Ghez. “Trajectory Control in Targeted Force Impulses. II. Pulse
Height Control.” Experimental Brain Research 67 (1987a): 241-52.
________. “Trajectory Control in Targeted Force Impulses. III. Compensatory

Adjustments for Initial Errors.” Experimental Brain Research 67 (1987b): 253-69.
Gordon, J., M. F. Ghilardi, and C. Ghez. “Accuracy of Planar Reaching Movements. I.

Independence of Direction and Extent Variability.” Experimental Brain Research 99
(1994b): 97-111.
Gordon, J., M. F. Ghilardi, S. E. Cooper, and C. Ghez. “Accuracy of Planar Reaching

Movements. II. Systematic Extent Errors Resulting from Inertial Anisotropy.”
Experimental Brain Research 99 (1994a): 112-30.
Göttestam, K. O. “Left-Handedness Among Students of Architecture and Music.”

Perceptual and Motor Skills 70 (1990): 1323-27.
Grasby, P. M., C. D. Frith, K. J. Friston, C. Bench, R. S. J. Frackowiak and R. J. Dolan.

“Functional Mapping of Brain Areas Implicated in Auditory-Verbal Memory
Function.” Brain 1 (1993): 1-20.
Graton, S. T., M. A. Arbib, L. Fadiga, and G. Rizzolatti. “Localization of Grasp

Representation in Humans by Positron Emission Tomography. 2: Observation
Compared with Imagination.” Experimental Research 112 (1996a): 103-11.
Graziano, M. “The Organization of Behavioral Repertoire in Motor Cortex.” Annual

Review of Neuroscience 29 (2006): 105-34.
161
Graziano, M. S. A., C. S. R. Taylor, T. Moore, and D. F. Cooke. “The Cortical Control

of Movement Revisited.” Neuron 36 (2002): 1-20.
Greenough, W. T., J. R. Larson, and G. S. Withers. “Effects of Unilateral and Bilateral

Training in a Reaching Task on Dendritic Branching of Neurons in the Rat Motor-
Sensory Forelimb Cortex.” Behavioral and Neural Biology 44 (1985): 301-14.
Grewingk, Maria von. Eine Tochter Alt-Rigas, Schülerin Chopins. Riga: Löfflerm
1928.
Grèzes, J., J. L. Armony, J. Rowe, and R. E. Passingham. “Activations Related to

‘Mirror’ and ‘Canonical’ Neurones in the Human Brain: An fMRI Study.”
NeuroImage 18 (2003): 928-37.
Grèzes, J. and J. Decety. “Functional Anatomy of Execution, Mental Simulation,

Observation, and Verb Generation of Actions: A Meta-Analysis.” Human Brain
Mapping 12 (2001): 1-19.
Griffiths, T. D., C. Büchel, R. S. J. Frackowiak and R. D. Patterson. “Analysis of

Temporal Structure in Sound by the Human Brain.” Nature Neuroscience 1 (1998):
422-7.
Griffiths, T. D., I. Johnsrude, J. L. Dean, and G. G. R. Green. “A Common Neural

Substrate for the Analysis of Pitch and Duration Pattern in Segmented Sound?”
NeuroReport 10 (1999): 3825-30.
Grush, R. “The Emulation Theory of Representation: Motor Control, Imagery, and

Perception.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2004): 377-442.
Guillery, R. W. “Branching Thalamic Afferents Link Action and Perception.” Journal

of Neurophysiology 90 (2003): 539-48.
Gustin, W. C. “The Development of Exceptional Research Mathematicians.” In

Developing Talent in Young People, ed. B. S. Bloom, 270-331. New York:
Ballantine Books, 1985.
Häger-Ross, C. and M. H. Schieber. “Quantifying the Independence of Human Finger

Movements: Comparisons of Digits, Hands, and Movement Frequencies.” Journal of
Neuroscience 20(22) (2000): 8542-50.
Haken, H., J. Kelso, and H. Bunz. “A Theoretical-Model of Phase-Transitions in Human

Hand Movements.” Biological Cybernetics 51 (1985): 347-56.
162
Häkkinen, K., R. U. Newton, S. E. Gordon, M. McCormick, J. S. Volek, B. C. Nindi, L.

A. Gotshalk, W. W. Campbell, W. J. Evans, A. Häkkinen, B. J. Humphries, and W. J.
Kraemer. “Changes in Muscle Morphology, Electromyographic Activity, and Force
Production Characteristics During Progressive Strength Training in Young and Older
Men.” Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences Medical Sciences 53
(1998): B415-23.
Hall, C., L. Bernoties, and D. Schmidt. “Interference Effects of Mental Imagery on a

Motor Task.” British Journal of Psychology 86 (1995): 181-90.
Halland, K. Y. and D. L. Harrington. “Hemispheric Asymmetry of Movement.” Current

Hallett, M. and J. Grafman. “Executive Function and Motor Skill Learning.” In The
Cerebellum and Cognition, ed. J. D. Schmahmann, 297-323. New York: Academic
Press, 1997.
Halpern, A. R. “Mental Scanning in Auditory Images for Songs.” Journal of

Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 14 (1988): 434-43.
________. “Memory for the Absolute Pitch in Familiar Songs.” Memory & Cognition
17 (1989): 572-81.
________. “Musical Aspects of Auditory Imagery.” In Auditory Imagery, ed. D.

Reisberg, 1-28. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.
________. “Cerebral Substrates of Musical Imagery.” In The Biological

Foundations of Music (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences), ed. R.J.
Zatorre and I. Peretz, Vol. 930, 179-92. New York: New York Academy of Sciences,
2001.
Halpern, A. R. and R. J. Zatorre. “When that Tune Runs Through Your Head: A PET
Investigation of Auditory Imagery for Familiar Melodies.” Cerebral Cortex 9 (1999):
697-704.
Halpern, A. R., R. J. Zatorre, M. Bouffard, and J. A. Johnson. “Behavioral and Neural

Correlates of Perceived and Imagined Musical Timbre.” Neuropsychologia 42(9)
(2004): 1281-92.
Halsband, U. “Left Hemisphere Preponderance in Trajectorial Learning.” NeuroReport

3 (1992): 397-400.
163
Halsband, U. and R. K. Lange. “Motor Learning in Man: A Review of Functional and

Clinical Studies.” Journal of Physiology, Paris 99 (2006): 414-24.
Hamada, Y., T. Nozawa, H. Kado, and R. Suzuki. “Different Laterality Between the
Thumb and Index Finger in Human SII Activities.” NeuroReport 11 (2000): 3603-06.
Hamze, F., M. Rijntjes, C. Dettmers, V. Glauche, C. Weiller, and C. Buchel. “The

Human Action Recognition System and its Relationship to Broca’s Area: An fMRI
Study.” NeuroImage 19 (2003): 637– 44.
Hanakawa, T., I. Immisch, K. Toma, M. A. Dimyan, P. Van Gelderen, and M. Hallett.

“Functional Properties of Brain Areas Associated with Motor Execution and
Imagery.” Journal of Neurophysiology 89 (2003): 989-1002.
Handel, S. and G. R. Lawson. “The Contextual Nature of Rhythmic Interpretation.”

Handel, S. and J. S. Oshinsky. “The Meter of Syncopated Auditory Polyrhythms.”

Hardyck, C. and L. F. Petrinovich. “Left-Handedness.” Psychological Bulletin 84

(1977): 385-404.
Harris, C. M. and Wolpert, D. M. “Signal-Dependent Noise Determines Motor

Planning.” Nature 394 (1998): 780-4.
Harris, C. S. “Perceptual Adaptation to Inverted, Reversed, and Displaced Vision.”

Psychological Review 72 (1965): 419-44.
Hasegawa, T., K. Matsuki, T. Ueno, Y. Maeda, Y. Matsue, Y. Konishi, and N. Sadato.

“Learned Audio-Visual Cross-Modal Associations in Observed Piano Playing
Activate the Left Planum Temporale. An fMRI Study.” Cognitive Brain Research 20
(2004): 510-18.
Haslinger, B., P. Erhard, E. Altenmüller, A. Hennenlotter, M.

Schwaiger, H. G. von Einsiedel, E. Rummeny, B. Conrad, and A. O. Ceballos-
Baumann. “Reduced Recruitment of Motor Association Areas During Bimanual
Coordination in Concert Pianists.” Human Brain Mapping 22 (2004): 206-15.
Haslinger, B., P. Erhard, E. Altenmüller, U. Schroeder, H. Boecker, and A. O. Ceballos-

Baumann. “Transmodal Sensorimotor Networks During Action Observation in
Professional Pianists.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17(2) (2005): 282-93.
164
Hassler, M. and N. Birbaumer. “Handedness, Musical Abilities, and Dihaptic and

Dichotic Performance in Adolescents: A Longitudinal Study.” Developmental
Neuropsychology 4 (1988): 129-45.
Hather, B. M., P. A. Tesch, P. Buchanan, and G. A. Dudley. “Influence of Eccentric

Actions on Skeletal Muscle Adaptations to Resistance Training.” Acta Physiologica
Scandinavica 143 (1991): 177-85.
Haueisen, J. and T. R. Knösche. “Involuntary Motor Activity in Pianists Evoked by

Music Perception.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 13(6) (2001): 786-92.
Hay, J. C., H. L. Pick, and K. Ikeda. “Visual Capture Produced by Prism Spectacles.”
Psychonomic Science 2 (1965): 215-6.
Heiser, M., M. Iacoboni, F. Maeda, J. Marcus, and J. C. Mazziotta. “The Essential Role
of Broca’s Area in Imitation.” European Journal of Neuroscience 17 (2003): 1123-8.
Hellman, H. Great Feuds in Science: Ten of the Liveliest Disputes Ever. New York:
Wiley, 1998.
Helsen, W. F., J. L. Starkes, and N. J. Hodges. “Team Sports and the Theory of
Deliberate Practice.” Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 20 (1998): 12-34.
Henshaw, E. M. and P. G. Homan. “A Note on Over-Training.” British Journal of

Psychology 20 (1930): 333-5.
Henson, R. N. A., M. D. Rugg, T. Shallice, O. Josephs, and R. J. Dolan. “Recollection

and Familiarity in Recognition Memory: An Event Related Functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Study.” Journal of Neuroscience 19 (1999): 3962-72.
Heuer, H., W. Spijkers, T. Kleinsorge, H. van der Loo, and C. Steglich, “The Time-
Course of Cross-Talk During the Simultaneous Specification of Bimanual Movement
Amplitudes.” Experimental Brain Research 118 (1998): 381-92.
Hickok, G. and D. Poeppel. “Dorsal and Ventral Streams: A Framework for

Understanding Aspects of the Functional Anatomy of Language.” Cognition 92
(2004): 131-8.
Hicks, R. E. “Asymmetry of Bilateral Transfer.” American Journal of Psychology 87

(1974): 667-74.
165
Hicks, R. E., J. M. Frank, and M. Kinsbourne. “The Locus of Bimanual Skill Transfer.”
The Journal of General Psychology 107 (1982): 277-81.
Hickson, R. C., K. Hidaka, C. Foster, M. T. Falduto, and R. T. Chatterton. “Successive

Time Courses of Strength Development and Steroid Hormone Responses to Heavy-
Resistance Training.” Journal of Applied Physiology 76 (1994): 663-70.
Higgins, Joseph R. and Ree K. Spaeth. “Relationship Between Consistency of

Movement and Environmental Condition.” Quest 17(1) (1972): 619.
Highben, Z. and C. Palmer. “Effects of Auditory and Motor Mental Practice in

Memorized Piano Performance.” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music
Education 159 (2004): 58-65.
Hikosaka, O., H. Nakahara, M. K. Rand, K. Sakai, X. Lu, K. Nakamura, S. Miyachi,

and K. Doya. “Parallel Neural Networks for Learning Sequential Procedures.”
Trends in Neurosciences 22 (1999): 464-71.
Hochman, S. and D. McCrea. “Effects of Chronic Spinalization on Ankle Extensor

Motoneurons. II. Motoneuron Electrical Properties.” Journal of Neurophysiology
71(1994): 1468-79.
Hodge, T. and J. Deakin. “Deliberate Practice and Expertise in the Martial Arts: The
Role of Context in Motor Recall.” Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 20 (1998):
260-79.
Holcomb, H. H., D. R. Medoff, P. J. Caudill, Z. Zaho, A. C. Lahti, R. F. Dannals, and C.

A. Tamminga. “Cerebral Blood Flow Relationships Associated with a Difficult Tone
Recognition Task in Trained Normal Volunteers.” Cerebral Cortex 8 (1998): 534-42.
Holland, Jeanne. “Chopin’s Piano Method.” Piano Quarterly 33(129) (1985): 32-43.
________. “Chopin the Teacher.” Journal of the American Liszt Society 17 (1985): 39-
48.
Houk, J. C., J. L. Davis, and D. G. Beiser, ed. Models of Information Processing in the
Basal Ganglia. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995.
Howard, J. D. and R. M. Enoka. “Maximum Bilateral Contractions are Modified by

Neurally Mediated Interlimb Effects.” Journal of Applied Physiology 70 (1991): 306-
16.
166
Huang, He, Steven L. Wolf, and Jiping He. “Recent Developments in Biofeedback for
Neuromotor Rehabilitation.” Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 3(11)
(2006), http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/3/1/11.
Hubbard, T. L. and K. Stoeckig. “Musical Imagery: Generation of Tones and Chords.”

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 14 (1988):
656-67.
________. “The Representation of Pitch in Musical Imagery.” In

Auditory Imagery, ed. D. Reisberg, 199-236. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.
Hughes, H. C., T. M. Darcey, H. I. Barkan, P. D. Williamson, D. W. Roberts, and C. H.

Aslin. “Responses of Human Auditory Association Cortex to the Omission of an
Expected Acoustic Event.” NeuroImage 13 (2001): 1073-89.
Hund-Georgiadis, M., and D. Y. von Cramon. “Motor-Learning-Related Changes in

Piano Players and Non-Musicians Revealed by Functional Magnetic-Resonance
Signals.” Experimental Brain Research 125(4) (April 1999): 417-24.
Hutchinson, S., L. H. Lee, N. Gaab, and G. Schlaug. “Cerebellar Volume of Musicians.”

Cerebral Cortex 13(9) (2003): 943-9.
Iacoboni, M., I. Molnar-Szakacs, V. Gallese, G. Buccino, J. C. Mazziotta, and G.

Rizzolatti. “Grasping the Intentions of Others with One’s Own Mirror Neuron
System.” PLoS Biol 3(3) (2005): 529-35.
Iacoboni, M., R. P. Woods, M. Brass, H. Bekkering, J. C. Mazziotta, and G. Rizzolatti.

“Cortical Mechanisms of Human Imitation.” Science 286 (1999): 2526-28.
Ibbotson, N. R. and J. Morton. “Rhythm and Dominance.” Cognition 9 (1981): 125-38.
Imamizu, H., S. Miyauchi, T. Tamada, Y. Sasaki, R. Takino, B. Pütz, T. Yoshioka, and

M. Kawato. “Human Cerebellar Activity Reflecting an Acquired Internal Model of a
New Tool.” Nature 403 (2000): 192-5.
Imamizu, H., T. Kuroda, S. Miyauchi, T. Yoshioka, and M. Kawato. “Modular

Organization of Internal Models of Tools in the Human Cerebellum.” Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100 (2003): 5461-
66.
167
Indovina, I. and J. N. Sanes. “Combined Visual Attention and Finger Movement Effects
on Human Brain Representations.” Experimental Brain Research 140 (2001): 265-
79.
Isaac, A. R. and D. F. Marks. “Individual Differences in Imagery Experience:

Developmental Changes and Specialization.” British Journal of Psychology 85
(1994): 479-500.
Ito, M. “Mechanisms of Motor Learning in the Cerebellum.” Brain Research 886(1-2)

(2000): 237-45.
Ivry, R. “Cerebellar Timing Systems.” In The Cerebellum and Cognition, ed. J. D.

Schmahmann, 556-73. New York: Academic Press, 1997.
Ivry, R. B. and E. Hazeltine. “Subcortical Locus of Temporal Coupling in the Bimanual

Movements of a Callosotomy Patient.” Human Movement Science 18 (1999): 345-
75.
Ivry, R. B. and J. A. Fiez. “Cerebellar Contributions to Cognition and Imagery.” In The

New Cognitive Neurosciences, 2nd ed., ed. M. S. Gazzaniga, 999-1011. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 2000.
Jackendoff, R. “Musical Parsing and Musical Affect.” Music Perception 9 (1991): 199-
230.
Jackson, P. L., M. F. Lafleur, F. Malouin, C. Richards, and J. Doyon. “Potential Role of

Mental Practice Using Motor Imagery in Neurologic Rehabilitation.” Archives of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 82 (2001): 1133-41.
Jacobs, K. M. and J. P. Donoghue. “Reshaping the Cortical Motor Map by Unmasking

Latent Intracortical Connections.” Science 251(4996) (1991): 944-7.
Jagacinski, R. J., E. Marshburn, S. T. Klapp, and M. R. Jones. “Test of Parallel Versus

Integrated Structure in Polyrhythmic Tapping.” Journal of Motor Behavior 20 (1988):
416-42.
James, W. Principles of Physiology. New York: Holt, 1890.
Janata, P. “Brain Electrical Activity Evoked by Mental Formation of Auditory

Expectations and Images.” Brain Topography 13 (2001a): 169-93.
168
________. “Neurophysiological Measurements Underlying Auditory Image Formation

in Music.” In Musical Imagery, ed. R. I. Godoy and H. Jorgensen, 27-41. Lisse, The
Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger, 2001b.
Janata, P., J. L. Birk, J. D. Van Horn, M. Leman, B. Tillmann, and J. Bharucha. “The
Cortical Topography of Tonal Structures Underlying Western Music.” Science 298
(2002): 2167-70.
Janata, P. and K. Paroo. “Acuity of Auditory Images in Pitch and Time.” Perception &
Psychophysics 68(5) (2006): 829-44.
Janata, P. and S. T. Grafton. “Swinging in the Brain: Shared Neural Substrates for
Behaviors Related to Sequencing and Music.” Nature Neuroscience 6 (2003): 682-7.
Jäncke, L., G. Schlaug, and H. Steinmetz. “Hand Skill Asymmetry in Professional

Musicians.” Brain and Cognition 34 (1997): 424-32.
Jäncke, L., N. J. Shah, and M. Peters. “Cortical Activations in Primary and Secondary
Motor Areas for Complex Bimanual Movements in Professional Pianists.” Cognitive
Brain Research 10(1-2) (2000): 177-83.
Jarvelainen, J. and M. Schurmann. “The Motor Cortex Approximately 20 Hz Rhythm

Reacts Differently to Thumb and Middle Finger Stimulation: An MEG Study.”
NeuroReport 13 (2002): 1243-46.
Jeannerod, M. “The Representing Brain. Neural Correlates of Motor Intention and

Imagery.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (1994): 187-245.
________. “Mental Imagery in the Motor Context.” Neuropsychology 33 (1995): 1419-

32.
________. “Visual and Action Cues Contribute to the Self-Other Distinction.” Nature
Neuroscience 5 (2004): 422-3.
Jeannerod, M. and J. Decety. “Mental Motor Imagery: A Window Into the

Representational Stages of Action.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 5 (1995): 727-
32.
Jeannerod, M. and V. Frak. “Mental Imaging of Motor Activity in Humans.” Current

Opinion in Neurobiology 9(6) (1999): 735-9.
169
Jog, M. S., Y. Kubota, C. I. Connolly, V. Hillegaart, and A. M. Graybiel. “Building

Neural Representations of Habits.” Science 286 (1999): 1745-49.
Johansson, R. S. “Sensory Input and Control of Grip.” Novartis Foundation Symposium

218 (1998): 45-59.
Johansson, R. S. and K. Cole. “Sensory-Motor Coordination During Grasping and

Manipulative Actions.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2 (1992): 815-23.
Johnston, T. D. and L. Edwards. “Genes, Interactions and the Development of

Behaviour.” Psychological Review 109 (2002): 26-34.
Jones, D. A. and O. M. Rutherford. “Human Muscle Strength Training: The Effects of

Three Different Regimes and the Nature of the Resultant Changes.” Journal of
Physiology (London) 391 (1987): 1-11.
Jones, T. A. “Multiple Synapse Formation in the Motor Cortex Opposite Unilateral

Sensorimotor Cortex Lesions in Adult Rats.” Journal of Comparative Neurology 414
(1999): 57-66.
Jones, T. A., C. J. Chu, L. A. Grande, and A. D. Gregory. “Motor Skills Training

Enhances Lesion-Induced Structural Plasticity in the Motor Cortex of Adult Rats.”
Journal of Neuroscience 19 (1999): 10153-63.
Jordan, M. I. “Computational Aspects of Motor Control and Motor Learning.” In

Handbook of Perception and Action: Motor Skills, ed. H. Heuer and S. Keele, 71-120.
New York: Academic Press, 1996.
Jordan, M. I. and D. E. Rumelhart. “Forward Models: Supervised Learning with a Distal

Teacher.” Cognitive Science 16 (1992): 307-54.
Józsa, L., Z. Demel, E. Vándor, A. Réffy, and I. Szilágyi. “Specific Fibre Composition
of Human Hand and Arm Muscles.” Handchirurgie 10(3) (1978): 153-7.
Kadhiresan, V. A., C. A. Hassett, and J. A. Faulkner. “Properties of Single Motor Units

in Medial Gastrocnemius Muscles of Adult and Old Rats.” Journal of Physiology 493
(1996): 543–52.
Kakei, S., D. S. Hoffman, and P. L. Strick. “Muscle and Movement Representations in

the Primary Motor Cortex.” Science 285 (1999): 2136-39.
170
Kalakoski, V. “Effect of Level on Recall of Visually Presented Patterns of Musical

Notes.” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 48 (2007): 87-96.
Kalaska, J. F. “The Representation of Arm Movements in Postcentral and Parietal

Cortex.” Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 66 (1988): 455-63.
Kalaska, J. F., R. Caminiti, and A. P. Georgopoulos. “Cortical Mechanisms Related to

the Direction of Two-Dimensional Arm Movements: Relations in Parietal Area 5 and
Comparison with Motor Cortex.” Experimental Brain Research 51 (1983): 247-60.
Kalinkowski, A. G. “The Development of Olympic Swimmers.” In Developing Talent

in Young People, ed. B.S. Bloom, 139-92. New York: Ballantine Books, 1985.
Kamen, G. and C. A. Knight. “Training-Related Adaptations in Motor Unit Discharge

Rate in Young and Older Adults.” The Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological
Sciences and Medical Sciences 59 (2004): 1334-38.
Kanda, K. and K. Hashizume. “Changes in Properties of the Medial Gastrocnemius

Motor Units in Aging Rats.” Journal of Neurophysiology. 61 (1989): 737–46.
Kandel, E. R., J. H. Schwartz, and T. M. Jessell. Principles of Neural Science, 4th ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill/Appleton & Lange, 2000.
Kanfer, F. H. and M. K. Stevenson. “The Effects of Self-Regulation on Concurrent

Cognitive Processing.” Cognitive Therapy and Research 6 (1985): 667-84.
Kanfer, R. and P. L. Ackerman. “Motivation and Cognitive Abilities: An

Integrative/Aptitude—Treatment Interaction Approach to Skill Acquisition.” Journal
of Applied Psychology 74 (1989): 657-90.
Karni, A., G. Meyer, C. Rey-Hipolito, P. Jezzard, M. M. Adams, R. Turner, and L. G.

Ungerleider. “The Acquisition of Skilled Motor Performance: Fast and Slow
Experience-Driven Changes in Primary Motor Cortex.” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95(3) (1998): 861-8.
Karni, A., G. Meyer, P. Jezzard, M. M. Adams, R. Turner, and L. G. Ungerleider.

“Functional MRI Evidence for Adult Motor Cortex Plasticity During Motor Skill
Learning.” Nature 377(6545) (1995): 155-8.
Kawato, M. “Feedback-Error-Learning Neural Network for Supervised Learning.” In

Advanced Neural Computers, ed. R. Eckmiller, 365-72. Amsterdam: North-Holland,
1990.
171
________. “Internal Models for Motor Control and Trajectory Planning.” Current
Kawato, M. and H. Gomi. “The Cerebellum and VOR/OKR Learning Models.” Trends
in Neurosciences 15 (1992): 445-53.
Kawato, M., T. Kuroda, H. Imamizu, E. Nakano, S. Miyauchi, and T. Yoshioka.

“Internal Forward Models in the Cerebellum: fMRI Study on Grip Force and Load
Force Coupling.” Progress in Brain Research 142 (2003): 171-88.
Keele, S. W. “Movement Control in Skilled Motor Performance.” Psychological

Bulletin 70 (1968): 387-401.
________. “Behavioral Analysis of Movement.” In Handbook of Physiology: Section I:

The Nervous System. Volume II. Motor Control, Part 2., ed. V.B. Brooks, 1391-
1414. Bethesda, MA: American Physiological Society, Physiological Society, 1981.
Keele, S. W. and J. J. Summers. “The Structure of Motor Programs.” In Motor Control:

Issues and Trends, ed. G. S. Stelmach, 109-42. New York: Academic Press, 1976.
Keller, A. “Intrinsic Synaptic Organization of the Motor Cortex.” Cerebral Cortex 3

(1993): 430-41.
Kelso, J. A. S. “Phase Transitions and Critical Behavior in Human Bimanual

Coordination.” American Journal of Physiology 246 (1984): R1000–R1004.
________. Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior.

Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1995.
Kelso, J. A. S. and D. A. Engström. The Complementary Nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press, 2006.
Kelso, J. A. S., D. L. Southard, and D. Goodman. “On the Coordination of Two-Handed

Movements.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 5 (1979): 229–38.
________. “On the Nature of Human Interlimb Coordination.” Science 203 (1979):
1029–31.
Kelso, J. A. S., J. J. Buchanan, and S. A. Wallace. “Order Parameters for the Neural
Organization of Single, Multijoint Limb Movement Patterns.” Experimental Brain
Research 85 (1991): 432-44.
172
Kelso, J. A. S. and J. J. Jeka. “Symmetry Breaking Dynamics of Human Multilimb

Coordination.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance 18 (1992): 645-68.
Kennerley, S. W., J. Diedrichsen, E. Hazeltine, A. Semjen, and R. B. Ivry. “Callosotomy

Patients Exhibit Temporal Uncoupling During Continuous Bimanual Movements.”
Nature Neuroscience 5(4) (2002): 376-381.
Kermadi, I. and J. P. Joseph. “Activity in Caudate Nucleus of Monkey During Spatial

Sequencing.” Journal of Neurophysiology 74 (1995): 911-33.
Keysers, C., E. Kohler, M. A. Umiltà, L. Nanetti, L. Fogassi, and V. Gallese,

“Audiovisual Mirror Neurons and Action Recognition.” Experimental Brain
Research 153(4) (2003): 628-36.
Kilbreath, S. L., and S. C. Gandevia. “Limited Independent Flexion of the Thumb and
Fingers in Human Subjects.” Journal of Physiology, London 479 (1994): 487-97.
Kilner, J. M., C. Vargas, S. Duval, S. J. Blakemore, and A. Sirigu. “Motor Activation

Prior to Observation of a Predicted Movement.” Nature Neuroscience 7 (2004):
1299-1301.
Kilner, J. M., K. J. Friston, and C. D. Frith. “The Mirror-Neuron System: A Bayesian

Perspective.” NeuroReport 18(6) (2007): 619-23.
Kilner, James M. and Sarah-Jayne Blakemore. “How Does the Mirror Neuron System
Change During Development?” Developmental Science 10(5) (2007): 524-6.
Kimble, G. A. and L. C. Perlmuter. “The Problem of Volition.” Psychological Review 77

(1970): 361-84.
Kitazawa, S., T. Kimura, and P. B. Yin. “Cerebellar Complex Spikes Encode Both
Destinations and Errors in Arm Movements.” Nature 392 (1998): 494-7.
Klapp, S. T., J. M. Nelson, and R. J. Jagacinski. “Can People Tap Concurrent Bimanual
Rhythms Independently?” Journal of Motor Behavior 30(4) (1998): 301-22.
Klapp, S. T., M. D. Hill, J. G. Tyler, Z. E. Martin, R. J. Jagacinski, and M. R. Jones. “On

Marching to Two Different Drummers: Perceptual Aspects of the Difficulties.”
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 11
(1985): 814-27.
173
Kleczynski, Jean. How to Play Chopin. The Works of Frederic Chopin, Their Proper
Interpretation. Translated by Alfred Whittingham. London: William Reeves, 1913.
Kleim, J. A., E. Lussnig, E. R. Schwarz, T. A. Comery, and W. T. Greenough.

“Synaptogenesis and Fos Expression in the Motor Cortex of the Adult Rat After
Motor Skill Learning.” Journal of Neuroscience 16(14) (1996): 4529-35.
Kleim, J. A., S. Barbay, N. R. Cooper, T. M. Hogg, C. N. Reidel, M. S. Remple, and R. J.

Nudo. “Motor Learning-Dependent Synaptogenesis is Localized to Functionally
Reorganized Motor Cortex.” Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 77 (2002): 63-
77.
Kleim, J. A., S. Barbay, and R. J. Nudo. “Functional Reorganization of the Rat Motor
Cortex Following Motor Skill Learning.” Journal of Neurophysiology 80 (1998):
3321-25.
Kleim, J. A., T. M. Hogg, P. M. VandenBerg, N. R. Cooper, R. Bruneau, and M. Remple.

“Cortical Synaptogenesis and Motor Map Reorganization Occur During Late, but Not
Early, Phase of Motor Skill Learning.” Journal of Neuroscience 24 (2004): 628-33.
Klein, I., A. L. Paradis, J. B. Poline, S. M. Kosslyn, and D. LeBihan. “Transient Activity

in the Human Calcarine Cortex During Visual-Mental Imagery: An Event-Related
fMRI Study.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000): 15-23.
Kliegl, R., J. Smith, and P. B. Baltes. “Testing-the-Limits and the Study of Adult Age
Differences in Cognitive Plasticity of a Mnemonic Skill.” Developmental Psychology
25 (1989): 247-56.
________. “On the Locus and Process of Magnification of Age Differences During
Mnemonic Training.” Developmental Psychology 26 (1990): 894-904.
Knight, C. A. and G. Kamen. “Adaptations in Muscular Activation of the Knee Extensor

Muscles with Strength Training in Young and Older Adults.” Journal of
Electromyography and Kinesiology 2001 (11): 405-12.
Koczalski, Raoul. Frédéric Chopin. Betrachtungen, Skizzen, Analysen. Köln: Tischer

& Jagenberg, 1936.
Koelsch S, E. Schröger, and M. Tervaniemi. “Superior Pre-Attentive Auditory

Processing in Musicians.” NeuroReport 10(6) (1999): 1309-13.
174
Koh, T. J., M. D. Grabiner, and C. A. Clough. “Bilateral Deficit is Larger for Step Than
for Ramp Isometric Contractions.” Journal of Applied Physiology 74(3) (1993):
1200-5.
Kohl, R. M. and D. L. Roenker. “Mechanism Involvement During Skill Imagery.”

Journal of Motor Behavior 15 (1983): 179-90.
Kohler, Evelyne, Christian Keysers, M. Alessandra Umiltà, Leonardo Fogassi, Vittorio

Gallese, and Giacomo Rizzolatti. “Hearing Sounds, Understanding Actions: Action
Representation in Mirror Neurons.” Science 297(5582) (2002): 846-8.
Kolers, P. A. “Memorial Consequences of Automatized Encoding.” Journal of

Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 1 (1975): 689-701.
Kölsch, S., T. C. Gunter, D. Y. v. Cramon, S. Zysset, G. Lohmann, and A. D. Friederici.

“Bach Speaks: A Cortical ‘Language-network’ Serves the Processing of Music.”
NeuroImage 17(2) (2002): 956-66.
Komi, P. V. “Training of Muscle Strength and Power: Interaction of Neuromotoric,

Hypertrophic, and Mechanical Factors.” International Journal of Sports Medicine 7
(1986): 10-15.
Kornatz, K. W., E. A. Christou, and R. M. Enoka. “Practice Reduces Motor Unit

Discharge Variability in a Hand Muscle and Improves Manual Dexterity in Old
Adults.” Journal of Applied Physiology 98 (2005): 2072-80.
Kosslyn, S. M. and W. L. Thompson. “Shared Mechanisms in Visual Imagery and

Visual Perception: Insights from Cognitive Neuroscience.” In The New Cognitive
Neurosciences, ed. M. S. Gazzaniga, 975-85. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.
Kots, Y. M., V. I. Krinskiy, V. L. Naydin, and M. L. Shik. “The Control of Movements

of the Joints and Kinesthetic Afferentation.” In Models of Structural-Functional
Organization of Certain Biological Systems, ed. I. M. Gelfand, V. S. Gurfinkel, S. V.
Fomin, and M. L. Tsetlin, 373-81. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1971.
Kraemer, D. J. M., C. N. Macrae, A. E. Green, and W. M. Kelley. “Musical Imagery:

Sound of Silence Activates Auditory Cortex.” Nature 434 (2005): 158.
Krampe, R. T., and K. Anders Ericsson. “Maintaining Excellence: Deliberate Practice

and Elite Performance in Young and Older Pianists.” Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General 125(4) (1996): 331-59.
175
Krampe, R. T., R. Kliegl, U. Mayr, R. Engbert, and D. Vorberg. “The Fast and Slow of
Skilled Bimanual Rhythm Production: Parallel Versus Integrated Timing.” Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26(1) (2000):
206-33.
Krams, M., M. F. Rushworth, M. P. Deiber, R. S. Frackowiak, and R. E. Passingham.

“The Preparation, Execution and Suppression of Copied Movements in the Human
Brain.” Experimental Brain Research 120 (1998): 386-98.
Krigolson, Olave, and Geraldine Van Gyn. “Is There ‘Feedback’ During Visual
Imagery? Evidence From a Specificity of Practice Paradigm.” Canadian Journal of
Experimental Psychology 60(1) (2006): 24-32.
Krings, T., R. Töpper, H. Foltys, S. Erberich, R. Sparing, K. Willmes, and A. Thron.

“Cortical Activation Patterns During Complex Motor Tasks in Piano Players and
Control Subjects. A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.” Neuroscience
Letters 278(3) (2000): 189-93.
Kristeva, R., V. Chakarov, J. Schulte-Mönting, and J. Spreer. “Activation of Cortical

Areas in Music Execution and Imagining: A High-resolution EEG Study.”
NeuroImage 20(3) (2003): 1872-83.
Kukulka, C. G. and H. P. Clamann. “Comparison of the Recruitment and Discharge

Properties of Motor Units in Human Brachial Biceps and Adductor Pollicis During
Isometric Contractions.” Brain Research 219 (1981): 45-55.
Lahav, A., A. Boulanger, G. Schlaug, and E. Saltzman. “The Power of Listening:

Auditory-Motor Interactions in Musical Training,” Annals of the New York Academy
of Sciences 1060 (2005): 189-94.
Lahav, A., E. Saltzman, and G. Schlaug. “Action Representation of Sound: Audiomotor

Recognition Network While Listening to Newly Acquired Actions.” The Journal of
Neuroscience 27(2) (2007): 308-14.
Lang, Catherine and Marc H. Schieber. “Differential Impairment of Individuated Finger

Movements in Humans After Damage to the Motor Cortex or the Corticospinal
Tract.” Journal of Neurophysiology 90 (2003): 1160-70.
Langer, E. and G. Imber. “When Practice Makes Imperfect: Debilitating Effects of

Overlearning.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (1979): 2014-24.
176
Langheim, F. J., J. H. Calicott, V.S. Mattay, J. H. Duyn, and D. R. Weinberger. “Cortical

Systems Associated with Covert Music Rehearsal.” NeuroImage 16(4) (2002): 901-
8.
Larsson, L. “Histochemical Characteristics of Human Skeletal Muscle During Aging.”

Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 117(3) (1983): 469-71.
Larsson, L. and R. L. Moss. “Maximum Velocity of Shortening in Relation to Myosin

Isoform Composition in Single Fibres From Human Skeletal Muscles.” The Journal
of Physiology 472(1) (1993): 595-614.
Lashley, K. S. “The Accuracy of Movement in the Absence of Excitation from the

Moving Organ.” American Journal of Physiology 43 (1917): 169-94.
________. “The Problem of Serial Order in Behavior.” In Cerebral Mechanisms of

Behavior, ed. I. A. Jeffress., 112-31. New York: Wiley, 1951.
Laszlo, J. L., R. A. Baguley, and P. J. Bairstow. “Bilateral Transfer in Tapping Skill in

the Absence of Peripheral Information.” Journal of Motor Behavior 2 (1970): 261-
71.
Lateiner, Jordan E., and Robert L. Sainburg. “Differential Contributions of Vision and
Proprioception to Movement Accuracy.” Experimental Brain Research 151 (2003):
446-54.
Leavitt, J. “Cognitive Demands of Skating and Stick Handling in Ice Hockey.”

Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences 4 (1979): 46-55.
Lee, B. S. “Some Effects of Side-Tone Delay.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of

America 22 (1950): 639-40.
Lee, C. “Psyching Up for a Muscular Endurance Task: Effects of Image Content on

Performance and Mood State.” Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 12 (1990):
66-73.
Lee, D. J., Y. Chen, and G. Schlaug. “Corpus Callosum: Musician and Gender Effects.”
NeuroReport 14(2) (2003): 205-9.
Lee, T. D., S. P. Swinnen, and S. Verschueren. “Relative Phase Alterations During

Bimanual Skill Acquisition.” Journal of Motor Behavior 27 (1995): 263-74.
177
Lehéricy, S., H. Benali, P. F. Van de Moortele, M. Pélégrini-Issac, T. Waechter, K.

Ugurbil, and J. Doyon. “Distinct Basal Ganglia Territories are Engaged in Early and
Advanced Motor Sequence Learning.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America 102(35) (2005): 12566-71.
Lejeune, M. U., C. Decker, and X. Sanchez. “Mental Rehearsal in Table Tennis

Performance.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 79(1) (1994): 627-41.
Lemon, R. N. “The G. L. Brown Prize Lecture. Cortical Control of the Primate Hand.”
Experimental Physiology 78 (1993): 263-301.
Lenz, William von. “Chopin.” In The Great Piano Virtuosos of Our Time, Trans.
Madeleine R. Baker, 27-74. New York: Schirmer, 1899.
Lesgold, A. M. “Acquiring Expertise.” In Tutorials in Learning and Memory: Essays in

Honor of Gordon Bower, ed. J. R. Anderson and S. M. Kosslyn, 31-60. New York:
Freeman, 1984.
Lewis, B. and D. Linder. “Thinking About Choking? Attentional Processes and

Paradoxical Performance.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 (1997):
937-44.
Lewontin, R. C. It Ain’t Necessarily So: The Dream of the Human Genome and Other
Illusions. London: Granta Books, 2000.
Liegeois-Chauvel, C., A. Musolino, J. M. Badier, P. Marquis, and P. Chauvel. “Evoked

Potentials Recorded from the Auditory Cortex in Man: Evaluation and Topography of
the Middle Latency Components.” Electroencephalography and Clinical
Liu, Y., Y. Pu, J. H. Gao, L. M. Parsons, J. Xiong, M. Liotti, J. M. Bower, and P. T. Fo.
“The Human Red Nucleus and Lateral Cerebellum in Supporting Roles for Sensory
Information Processing.” Human Brain Mapping 10(4) (2000): 147-59.
Locke, S. and L. Kellar. “Categorical Perception in a Non-Linguistic Mode.” Cortex 9

(1973): 355-69.
Lotze, M., G. Scheler, H. R. Tan, C. Braun, and N. Birbaumer. “The Musician’s Brain:
Functional Imaging of Amateurs and Professionals During Performance and
Imagery.” NeuroImage 20 (2003): 1817-29.
178
Lotze, M., P. Montoya, M. Erb, E. Hulsmann, H. Flor, U. Klose, N. Birbaumer, and W.

Grodd. “Activation of Cortical and Cerebellar Motor Areas During Executed and
Imagined Hand Movements: An fMRI Study.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 11
(1999): 491-501.
Lotze, M., U. Heymans, N. Birbaumer, R. Veit, M. Erb, H. Flor, and U. Halsband.

“Differential Cerebral Activation During Observation of Expressive Gestures and
Motor Acts.” Neuropsychologia 44 (2006): 1787-95.
Macefield, V. G., A. J. Fuglevand, and B. Bigland-Ritchie. “Contractile Properties of

Single Motor Units in Human Toe Extensors Assessed by Intraneural Motor Axon
Stimulation.” Journal of Neurophysiology 75 (1996): 2509-19.
Maddock, R. J., A. S. Garrett, and M. H. Buonocore. “Remembering Familiar People:

The Posterior Cingulate Cortex and Autobiographical Memory Retrieval.”
Neuroscience 104 (2001): 667-76.
Maess, B., S. Koelsch, T. C. Gunter, and A. D. Friederici. “Musical Syntax is Processed

in Broca’s Area: An MEG Study.” Nature Neuroscience 4 (2001): 540-45.
Marr, D. “A Theory of Cerebellar Cortex.” Journal of Physiology 202 (1969): 437-70.
Marsen, C. D., P. A. Merton, and H. B. Morton. “Anticipatory Postural Responses in

the Human Subject.” Journal of Physiology 275(Suppl) (1978): 47-48P.
Marteniuk, R. G., C. L. MacKenzie, and D. M. Baba. “Bimanual Movement Control:

Information Processing and Interaction Effects.” The Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology A36(2) (1984): 335-65.
Marzke, M. W. “Precision Grips, Hand Morphology, and Tools.” American Journal of

Physical Anthropology 102 (1997): 91-110.
Masters, R. S. W. “Knowledge, Knerves, and Know-How: The Role of Explicit Versus

Implicit Knowledge in the Breakdown of a Complex Motor Skill Under Pressure.”
British Journal of Psychology 83 (1992): 343-58.
Masters, R. S. W., R. C. J. Polman, and N. V. Hammond. “‘Reinvestment:’ A Dimension

of Personality Implicated in Skill Breakdown Under Pressure.” Personality &
Individual Differences 14 (1993): 655-66.
179
McCartney, N., D. Moroz, S. H. Garner, and A. J. McComas. “The Effects of Strength

Training in Patients with Selected Neuromuscular Disorder.” Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise 20 (1988): 362-8.
McDonagh, M. J. N. and C. T. M. Davies. “Adaptive Response of Mammalian Skeletal

Muscle to Exercise with High Loads.” European Journal of Applied Physiology 52
(1984): 139-55.
McGurk, H. and J. McDonald. “Hearing Lips and Seeing Voices.” Nature 264 (1976):
746-8.
Meacci, W. G. and D. L. Pastore. “The Effects of Occluded Vision and Imagery on

Putting Golf Balls.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 80(1) (1995): 179-186.
Mechsner, F., D. Kerzel, G. Knoblich, and W. Prinz. “Perceptual Basis of Bimanual

Coordination.” Nature 414 (2001): 69-73.
Medina, J. F., K. S. Garcia, W. L. Nores, and N. M. Taylor. “Timing Mechanisms in the

Cerebellum: Testing Predictions of a Large-Scale Computer Simulation.” Journal of
Neuroscience 20 (2000): 5516-25.
Mehta, B. and S. Schaal. “Forward Models in Visuomotor Control.” Journal of

Meister, I. G., T. Krings, H. Foltys, B. Boroojerdi, M. Müller, R. Töpper, and A. Thron.

“Playing Piano in the Mind—An fMRI Study on Music Imagery and Performance in
Pianists.” Cognitive Brain Research 19 (2004): 219-28.
Mendoza, D. W. and H. Wichman. “‘Inner’ Dart: Effects of Mental Practice on

Performance of Dart Throwing.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 47 (1978): 1195-99.
Merton, P. A. “How We Control the Contraction of Our Muscles.” Scientific American

226 (1972): 30-7.
Meyer, D. E., J. E. K. Smith, and C. E. Wright. “Models for the Speed and Accuracy of
Aimed Movements.” Psychological Review 89 (1982): 449-82.
Meyer-Lohmann, J., C. N. Christakos, and H. Wolf. “Dominance of the Short-Latency

Component in Perturbation Induced Electromyographic Responses of Long-Trained
Monkeys.” Experimental Brain Research 64 (1986): 393-9.
180
Miall, R. C. and D. M. Wolpert. “Forward Models for Physiological Motor Control.”

Neural Networks 9 (1996): 1265-79.
Mikuli, Carl. Foreword to Fr. Chopin’s’ Pianoforte-Werke, 17 vols., ed. Carl Mikuli.
Leipzig: Kistner, 1880.
Milisen, R. and C. V. Riper. “Differential Transfer of Training in a Rotary Activity.”

Journal of Experimental Psychology 24 (1939): 640-6.
Milner, A. D. and M. A. Goodale. The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1995.
Minetti, A. E., L. P. Ardigò, and T. McKee. “Keystroke Dynamics and Timing:

Accuracy, Precision and Difference Between Hands in Pianist’s Performance.”
Journal of Biomechanics 40(16) (2007): 3738-43.
Molnar-Szakacs, Istvan and Katie Overy. “Music and Mirror Neurons: From Motion to
‘e’motion.” Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (2006): 235-41.
Monsaas, J. A. “Learning to be a World-Class Tennis Player.” In Developing Talent in

Young People, ed. B.S. Bloom, 211-69. New York: Ballantine Books, 1985.
Monster, A. W. and H. Chan. “Isometric Force Production by Motor Units of Extensor

Digitorum Communis Muscle in Man.” Journal of Neurophysiology 40 (1977):
1432-43.
Moore, K. L. and A. F. Dalley. “The Upper Limb.” In Clinically Oriented Anatomy, 5th
ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.
Moritz, C. T., B. K. Barry, M. A. Pascoe, and R. M. Enoka. “Discharge Rate Variability

Influences the Variation in Force Fluctuations Across the Working Range of a Hand
Muscle.” Journal of Neurophysiology 93 (2005): 2449-59.
Morris, R., D. N. Pandya, and M. Petrides. “Fiber System Linking the Mid-Dorsolateral
Frontal Cortex with the Retrosplenial/Presubicular Region in the Rhesus Monkey.”
Journal of Comparative Neurology 407 (1999): 183-92.
Mottram, C. J., E. A. Christou, F. G. Meyer, and R. M. Enoka. “Frequency Modulation

of Motor Unit Discharge Has Task-Dependent Effects on Fluctuations in Motor
Output.” Journal of Neurophysiology 94 (2005): 2878-87.
181
Mulder, T., J. B. H. Hochstenbach, M. J. G. van Heuvelen, and A. R. den Otter. “Motor

Imagery: The Relation Between Age and Imagery Capacity.” Human Movement
Science 26 (2007): 203-11.
Mulder, T., S. Zijlstra, W. Zijlstra, and J. Hochstenbach. “The Role of Motor Imagery in
Learning a Totally Novel Movement.” Experimental Brain Research 154 (2004):
211-17.
Mulder, T. and W. Hulstyn. “Sensory Feedback Therapy and Theoretical Knowledge of

Motor Control and Learning.” American Journal of Physical Medicine 63(5) (1984):
226-44.
Münte, T. F., E. Altenmüller, and L. Jäncke. “The Musician’s Brain as a Model of

Neuroplasticity.” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 3 (2002): 473-8.
Münte, T. F., W. Nager, T. Beiss, C. Schroeder, and E. Altenmüller. “Specialization of

the Specialized: Electrophysiological Investigations in Professional Musicians.”
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 999 (November 2003): 131-39.
Mussa-Ivaldi, F. A. “Modular Features of Motor Control and Learning.” Current

Nakada, T., Y. Fujii, K. Suzuki, and I. L. Kwee. “‘Musical Brain’ Revealed by High-
Field (3Tesla) Functional MRI.” NeuroReport 9 (1998): 3853-56.
Napier, J. “The Evolution of the Hand.” Scientific American 207 (1962): 56-62.
Narici, M. V., G. S. Roi, L. Landoni, A. E. Minetti, and P. Cerretelli. “Changes in

Forces, Cross-Sectional Areas and Neural Activation During Strength Training and
Detraining of the Human Quadriceps.” European Journal of Applied Physiology 66
(1989): 310-9.
Nelissen, K., G. Luppino, W. Vanduffel, G. Rizzolatti, and G. A. Orban. “Observing

Others: Multiple Action Representation in the Frontal Lobe.” Science 310 (2005):
332-36.
Niecks, Frederick. Frederick Chopin as a Man and Musician. Vol. II. London:
Novello, 1902.
Nishitani, N. and R. Hari. “Temporal Dynamics of Cortical Representation for Action.”

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97
(2000): 913-18.
182
Nissen, M. J. and P. Bullemer. “Attentional Requirements of Learning: Evidence from

Performance Measures.” Cognitive Psychology 19 (1987): 1-32.
________. “Viewing Lip Forms: Cortical Dynamics.” Neuron 36 (2002): 1211-20.
Noel, R. “The Effect of Visuo-Motor Behavioural Rehearsal of Tennis Performance.”

Journal of Sport Psychology 2 (1980): 221-6.
Nordstrom, M. A., and S. L. Butler. “Reduced Intracortical Inhibition and Facilitation of

Corticospinal Neurons in Musicians.” Experimental Brain Research 144(3) (2002):
336-42.
Nottebohm, Fernando. “Ontogeny of Bird Song.” Science 167(3920) (1970): 950-6.
Nyberg, Lars, Johan Eriksson, Anne Larsson, and Petter Marklund. “Learning by Doing
Versus Learning by Thinking: An fMRI Study of Motor and Mental Training.”
Ohnishi, T., H. Matsuda, T. Asada, M. Aruga, M. Hirakata, M. Nishikawa, A. Katoh, and

E. Imabayashi. “Functional Anatomy of Musical Perception in Musicians.” Cerebral
Cortex 11(8) (2001): 754-60.
Ohtsuki, T. “Decrease in Human Voluntary Isometric Arm Strength Induced by

Simultaneous Bilateral Exertions.” Behavioural Brain Research 7 (1983): 165-78.
Olafsdottir, Halla, Vladimir M. Zatsiorsky, and Mark L. Latash. “Is the Thumb a Fifth
Finger? A Study of Digit Interaction During Force Production Tasks.” Experimental
Brain Research 160 (2005): 203-13.
Oldfield, R. C. “Handedness in Musicians.” British Journal of Psychology 60 (1969):

91-9.
Ortmann, Otto. The Physical Basis of Piano Touch and Tone: An Experimental
Investigation of the Effect of the Player’s Touch Upon the Tone of the Piano. New
York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1925.
________. The Physiological Mechanics of Piano Technique. New York: E.P. Dutton
& Co., 1929.
Ostry, D .J. and A. G. Feldman. “A Critical Evaluation of the Force Control Hypothesis
in Motor Control.” Experimental Brain Research 153 (2003): 275-88.
183
Pantev, C., O. Bertrand, C. Eulitz, C. Verkindt, S. Hampson, G. Schuierer, and T. Elbert.

“Specific Tonotopic Organizations of Different Areas of the Human Auditory Cortex
Revealed by Simultaneous Magnetic and Electric Recordings.”
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 94 (1995): 26-40.
Pantev, C. R. Oostenveld, A. Engelien, B. Ross, L. E. Roberts, and M. Hoke. “Increased

Auditory Cortical Representation in Musicians.” Nature 392 (1998): 811-14.
Parlow, S. E. and M. Kinsbourne. “Asymmetrical Transfer of Training Between Hands:

Implications for Interhemispheric Communication in Normal Brain.” Brain and
Cognition 11 (1989): 98-113.
Parsons, L. M. “Exploring the Functional Neuroanatomy of Music Performance,

Perception and Comprehension.” In The Cognitive Neuroscience of Music, ed. R. J.
Zatorre and I. Peretz, 247-68. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Parsons, L. M., J. Sergent, D. A. Hodges, and P. T. Fox. “The Brain Basis of Piano
Performance.” Neuropsychologia 43 (2005): 199-215.
Parsons, L. M. and P. T. Fox. “Sensory and Cognitive Tasks.” In The Cerebellum and
Cognition, International Review of Neurobiology, Vol. 41, ed. J. D. Schmahmann,
255-72. San Diego: Academic Press, 1997.
Pascual-Leone, A., A. Cammarota, E. M. Wassermann, J. P. Brasil-Neto, L. G. Cohen,

and M. Hallett. “Modulation of Motor Cortical Outputs to the Reading Hand of
Braille Readers.” Annals of Neurology 34 (1993): 33-7.
Pascual-Leone, A., D. Nguyet, L. G. Cohen, J. P. Brasil-Neto, A. Cammarota, and M.

Hallett. “Modulation of Muscle Responses Evoked by Transcranial Magnetic
Stimulation During the Acquisition of New Fine Motor Skills.” Journal of
Pascual-Leone, A., E. M. Wassermann, N. Sadato, and M. Hallett. “The Role of Reading

Activity on the Modulation of Motor Cortical Outputs to the Reading Hand in Braille
Readers.” Annals of Neurology 34 (1993): 33-7.
Pascual-Leone, A., J. Grafman, and M. Hallett. “Procedural Learning and Prefrontal

Cortex.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 769 (1995): 61-70.
Passingham, R. E. Frontal Lobes and Voluntary Action. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1993.
184
Patel, V. L. and G. J. Groen. “The General and Specific Nature of Medical Expertise: A
Critical Look.” In Toward a General Theory of Expertise, ed. K.A. Ericsson and J.
Smith, 93-125. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Patten, C. and G. Kamen. “Adaptations in Motor Unit Discharge Activity with Force
Control Training in Young and Older Human Adults.” European Journal of Applied
Physiology and Occupational Physiology 83 (2000): 128-43.
Patuzzo, S., A. Fiaschi, and P. Manganotti. “Modulation of Motor Cortex Excitability in

the Left Hemisphere During Action Observations: A Single- and Paired-Pulse
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study of Self- and Non-Self-Action Observation.”
Penfield, W. and E. Boldrey. “Somatic Motor and Sensory Representation in the

Cerebral Cortex of Man as Studied by Electrical Stimulation.” Brain 60 (1937): 389-
443.
Peper, C. E., P. J. Beek, and P. C. W. van Wieringen. “Bifurcation in Polyrhythmic

Tapping: In Search of Farey Principles.” In Tutorials in Motor Neuroscience, ed.
G.E. Stelmach, 413-31. New York: Kluwer, 1991.
________. “Multifrequency Coordination in Bimanual Tapping: Asymmetrical

Coupling and Signs of Supercriticality.” Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Human Perception and Performance 19 (1993): 416-28.
________. “Frequency-Induced Transitions in Bimanual Tapping.” Biological

Cybernetics 73 (1995): 301-9.
Peper, C. L., A. Ridderikhoff, A. Daffertshofer, and P. J. Beek, “Explanatory Limitations

of the HKB Model: Incentives for a Two-Tiered Model of Rhythmic Interlimb
Coordination.” Human Movement Science 23 (2004): 673-97.
Perelle, I. B. and L. Ehrman. “An International Study of Human Handedness: The

Data.” Behavior Genetics 24 (1994): 217-28.
Perez, M. A., B. K. Lungholt, K. Nyborg, and J. B. Nielsen. “Motor Skill Training

Induces Changes in the Excitability of the Leg Cortical Area in Healthy Humans.”
Perry, H. M. “The Relative Efficiency of Actual and Imaginary Practice in 5 Selected

Tasks.” Archives of Psychology 4 (1939): 5-75.
185
Peters, M. “Constraints in the Coordination of Bimanual Movements and Their

Expression in Skilled and Unskilled Subjects.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology A37 (1985): 171-96.
Peters, M. and S. Schwartz. “Coordination of the Two Hands and Effects of Attentional
Manipulation in the Production of a Bimanual 2:3 Polyrhythm.” Australian Journal of
Psychology 41(2) (1989): 215-24.
Pew, R. W. “Acquisition of Hierarchical Control Over the Temporal Organization of a

Skill.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 71(5) (1966): 764-71.
Pfordresher, P. Q. “Auditory Feedback in Music Performance: The Role of Melodic

Structure and Musical Skill.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception & Performance 29 (2005): 1331-45.
Pfordresher, P. Q. and C. Palmer. “Effects of Hearing the Past, Present, or Future During
Music Performance.” Perception & Psychophysics 68(3) (2006): 362-76.
Phelps, R. M. and J. Shanteau. “Livestock Judges: How Much Information Can an

Expert Use?” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 21 (1978): 209-19.
Pick, H. L., D. H. Warren, and J. C. Hay. “Sensory Conflict in Judgments of Spatial

Direction.” Perception and Psychophysics 6 (1969): 203-5.
Platel, H., C. Price, J. C. Baron, R. Wise, J. Lambert, R. Frackowiak, B. Lechevalier,

and F. Eustache. “The Structural Components of Music Perception. A Functional
Anatomical Study.” Brain 120 (1997): 229-43.
Plautz, E. J., G. W. Milliken, and R. J. Nudo. “Effects of Repetitive Motor Training on

Movement Representations in Adult Squirrel Monkeys: Role of Use Versus
Learning.” Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 74 (2000): 27-55.
Ploutz, L. L., P. A. Tesch, R. L. Biro, and G. A. Dudley. “Effect of Resistance Training

on Muscle Use During Exercise.” Journal of Applied Physiology 76 (1994): 1675-81.
Porro, C. A., M. P. Francescato, V. Cettolo, M. E. Diamond, P. Baraldi, C. Zuiani, M.

Bazzocchi, and P. E. di Prampero. “Primary Motor and Sensory Cortex Activation
During Motor Performance and Motor Imagery: A Functional Magnetic Resonance
Imaging Study.” Journal of Neuroscience 16 (1996): 7688-98.
Prablanc, C., M. Desmurget, and H. Gréa. “Neural Control of On-Line Guidance of

Hand Reaching Movements.” Progress in Brain Research 142 (2003): 155-70.
186
Prablanc, C. and O. Martin. “Automatic Control During Hand Reaching at Undetected

Two-Dimensional Target Displacements.” Journal of Neurophysiology 67 (1992):
455-69.
Preilowski, B. F. B. “Possible Contribution of the Anterior Forebrain Sommissures to

Bimanual Motor Coordination.” Neuropsychologia 10 (1972): 267-77.
________. “Bilateral Motor Interaction: Perceptual-Motor Performance of Partial and

Complete ‘Split-Brain’ Patients.” In Cerebral Localization, ed. K. S. Zulich, O.
Creutzfeldt, and G. C. Galbraith, 115-32. Berlin: Springer, 1975.
________. “Phases of Motor Skills Acquisition: A Neuropsychological Approach.”

Human Movement Studies 3 (1977): 169-81.
Pressing, J., J. Summers, and J. Magill. “Cognitive Multiplicity in Polyrhythmic Pattern

Performance.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance 22(5) (1996): 1127-48.
Priest, A. G. and R. O. Lindsay. “New Light on Novice-Expert Differences in Physics

Problem Solving.” British Journal of Psychology 83 (1992): 389-405.
Prinz, W. “Perception and Action Planning.” European Journal of Cognitive

Psychology 9 (1997): 129-54.
Proctor, R. W. and A. Dutta. Skill Acquisition and Human Performance. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995.
Proteau, L., and J. Cournoyer. “Vision of the Stylus in a Manual Aiming Task: The
Effects of Practice.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 42A (1990):
811-28.
Proteau, L., R. G. Marteniuk, and L. Lévesque. “A Sensorimotor Basis for Motor

Learning: Evidence Indicating Specificity of Practice.” The Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology Section A 44(3) (1992): 557-75.
Proteau, L., R. G. Marteniuk, Y. Girouard, and C. Dugas. “On the Type of Information
Used to Control and Learn an Aiming Movement after Moderate and Extensive
Practice.” Human Movement Science 6 (1987): 181-9.
Puretz, S. L. “Bilateral Transfer: The Effects of Practice on the Transfer of Complex

Dance Movement Patterns.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 54 (1983):
48-54.
187
Purswell, Joan M. “Chopin as Teacher.” Clavier 18(7) (1979): 16-19.
Puttemans, Veerle, Nicole Wenderoth, and Stephan P. Swinnen. “Changes in Brain

Activation During the Acquisition of a Multifrequency Bimanual Coordination Task:
From the Cognitive Stage to Advanced Levels of Automaticity.” The Journal of
Neuroscience 25(17) (2005): 4270-78.
Ragert P., A. Schmidt, E. Altenmüller, H. R. Dinse. “Superior Tactile Performance and

Learning in Professional Pianists: Evidence for Meta-Plasticity in Musicians.”
Raibert, M. H. “Motor Control and Learning by the State-Space Model.” Ph.D. diss.,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977.
Raichle, M. E., A. M. MacLeod, A. Z. Snyder, W. J. Powers, D. A. Gusnard, and G. L.

Shulman. “A Default Mode of Brain Function.” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98 (2001): 676-82.
Ram, N., S. M. Riggs, S. Skaling, D. M. Landers, and P. McCullagh. “A Comparison of

Modelling and Imagery in the Acquisition and Retention of Motor Skills.” Journal of
Sports Sciences 25(5) (2007): 587-97.
Ranganathan, V. K., V. Siemionow, J. Liu, V. Sahgal, and G. H. Yue. “From Mental

Power to Muscle Power—Gaining Strength by Using the Mind.” Neuropsychologia
42 (2004): 944-56.
Redgrave, P., T. J. Prescott, and K. Gurney. “The Basal Ganglia: A Vertebrate Solution
to the Selection Problem?” Neuroscience 89 (1999): 1009-23.
Reilly, K. T., M. A. Nordstrom, and M. H. Schieber. “Short-Term Synchronization

Between Motor Units in Different Functional Subdivisions of the Human Flexor
Digitorum Profundus Muscle.” Journal of Neurophysiology 92 (2004): 734-42.
Repp, Bruno. “Effects of Auditory Feedback Deprivation on Expressive Piano

Performance.” Music Perception 16(4) (1999): 409-38.
Richardson, A. “Mental Practice: A Review and Discussion, Part I.” Research

Quarterly 38 (1967a): 95-107.
Ridding, M. C., B. Brouwer, and M. A. Nordstrom. “Reduced Interhemispheric

Inhibition in Musicians.” Experimental Brain Research 133(2) (2000): 249-53.
188
Rioult-Pedotti, M. S., D. Friedman, G. Hess, and J. P. Donoghue. “Strengthening of

Horizontal Cortical Connections Following Skill Learning.” Nature Neuroscience 1
(1998): 230-4.
Rizzolatti, G. and L. Craighero. “The Mirror-Neuron System.” Annual Review of

Neuroscience 27 (2004): 169-92.
Rizzolatti, G., L. Fadiga, V. Gallese, and L. Fogassi. “Premotor Cortex and the
Recognition of Motor Actions.” Cognitive Brain Research 3 (1996a): 131-41.
Rizzolatti, G., L. Fogassi, and V. Gallese. “Neurophysiological Mechanisms Underlying

the Understanding and Imitation of Action.” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 2(9)
(2001): 661-70.
Rizzolatti, G. and M. A. Arbib. “Language Within Our Grasp.” Trends in Neuroscience

21 (1998): 188-94.
Robb, Margaret D. “Feedback and Skill Learning.” In The Dynamics of Motor-Skill

Acquisition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
Rosenbaum, D. A. “Human Movement Initiation: Specification of Arm, Direction, and

Extent.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 109 (1980): 444-74.
Rosenthal, R. K. “The Relative Effects of Guided Model, Model Only, Guided Only, and
Practice Only on the Accuracy of Advanced Instrumentalists’ Musical Performance
Accuracy.” Journal of Research in Music Education 32 (1984): 265-73.
Rosenthal, R. K., M. Wilson, M. Evans, and L. Greenwalt. “Effects of Different Practice

Conditions on Advanced Instrumentalists’ Performance Accuracy.” Journal of
Research in Music Education 36 (1988): 250-7.
Ross, S. L. “The Effectiveness of Mental Practice in Improving the Performance of

College Trombonists.” Journal of Research in Music Education 33 (1985): 221-30.
Rossetti, Y., M. Desmerget, and C. Problanc. “Vectorial Coding of Movement: Vision,

Proprioception, or Both?” Journal of Neurophysiology 74 (1995): 457-63.
Rube, N. and N. H. Secher. “Effect of Training on Central Factors in Fatigue Following

Two- and One-Leg Static Exercise in Man.” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 141
(1990): 87-95.
189
Rudroff, T., B. Poston, I. S. Shin, J. Bojsen-Møller, and R. M. Enoka. “Net Excitation of

the Motor Unit Pool Varied with Load Type During Fatiguing Contractions.” Muscle
& Nerve 29 (2005): 78-87.
Rutherford, O. M. and D. A. Jones. “The Role of Learning and Coordination in Strength

Training.” European Journal of Applied Physiology 55 (1986): 100-5.
Ryan, E. D. and J. Simons. “Efficacy of Mental Imagery in Enhancing Mental Rehearsal

Motor Skills.” Journal of Sport Psychology 4 (1982): 41-51.
Sackett, R. S. “The Influence of Symbolic Rehearsal Upon the Retention of a Maze

Habit.” Journal of General Psychology 10 (1934): 376-95.
________. “The Relationship Between Amount of Symbolic Rehearsal and Retention of

a Maze Habit.” Journal of General Psychology 13 (1935): 113-28.
Sainburg, R. L. and D. Kalakanis. “Differences in Control of Limb Dynamics During

Dominant and Nondominant Arm Reaching.” Journal of Neurophysiology 83 (2000):
2661-75.
Sainburg, R. L., J. E. Lateiner, M. L. Latash, and L. B. Bagesteiro. “Effects of Altering

Initial Position on Movement Direction and Extent.” Journal of Neurophysiology 89
(2003): 401-15.
Sakai, H., O. Hikosaka, R. Takino, S. Miyauchi, M. Nielsen, and T. Tamada. “What and
When: Parallel and Convergent Processing in Motor Control.” Journal of
Neuroscience 20 (2000): 2691-2700.
Sakai, K., O. Hikosaka, S. Miyauchi, Y. Sasaki, N. Fujimaki, and B. Pütz.

“Presupplementary Motor Area Activation During Sequence Learning Reflects Visuo-
Motor Association.” Journal of Neuroscience 19(10) (1999): RC1.
Sakata, H. “Coding 3-D Features of Objects Used in Manipulation by Parietal Neurons.”

In Vision and Movement: Mechanisms in the Cerebral Cortex, ed. R. Caminiti, K. P.
Hoffmann, F. Lacquaniti, and J. Altman, 55-63. Strasbourg: Human Frontier Science
Program, 1996.
Salmoni, Alan W., Richard A. Schmidt, and Charles B. Walter. “Knowledge of Results
and Motor Learning: A Review and Critical Reappraisal.” Psychological Bulletin
95(3) (1984): 355-86.
190
Samson, S. and R. J. Zatorre. “Melodic and Harmonic Discrimination Following

Unilateral Cerebral Excision.” Brain and Cognition 7 (1988): 348-60.
Satoh, M., K. Takeda, K. Nagata, J. Hatazawa, and S. Kuzuhara. “Activated Brain

Regions in Musicians During an Ensemble: A PET Study.” Cognitive Brain
Research 12 (2001): 101-8.
Schantz, P. G., T. Moritani, E. Karlson, E. Johansson, and A. Lundh. “Maximal

Voluntary Force of Bilateral and Unilateral Leg Extension.” Acta Physiologica
Scandinavica 136 (1989): 185-92.
Schieber, Marc H. “Individuated Finger Movements of Rhesus Monkeys: A Means of

Quantifying the Independence of the Digits,” Journal of Neurophysiology 65 (1991):
1381-91.
________. “Constraints on Somatotopic Organization in the Primary Motor Cortex.”

________. “Training and Synchrony in the Motor System.” The Journal of

Neuroscience 22(13) (2002): 5277-81.
Schieber, Marc H. and Marco Santello. “Hand Function: Peripheral and Central
Constraints on Performance.” Journal of Applied Physiology 96 (2004): 2293-2300.
Schlaug, G. “The Brain of Musicians. A Model for Functional and Structural

Adaptation. Review.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 930 (2001):
281-99.
Schlaug, G., L. Jäncke, Y. Huang, and H. Steinmetz. “In Vivo Evidence of Structural
Brain Asymmetry in Musicians.” Science 267 (1995): 699-701.
Schlaug, G., L. Jäncke, Y. Huang, J. F. Staiger, and H. Steinmetz. “Increased Corpus

Callosum Size in Musicians.” Neuropsychologia 33 (1995): 1047-55.
Schmahmann, J. D., J. Doyon, D. McDonald, C. Holmes, K. Lavoie, A. S. Hurwitz, N.

Kabani, A. Toga, A. Evans, and M. Petrides. “Three-Dimensional MRI Atlas of the
Human Cerebellum in Proportional Stereotaxic Space.” NeuroImage 10 (1999): 233-
60.
Schmidt, R. A. “A Schema Theory of Discrete Motor Skill Learning.” Psychological

Review 82 (1975): 225-60.
191
________. “Control Processes in Motor Skills.” In Exercise and Sport Sciences

Reviews, ed. J. Keogh and R. S. Hutton, 229-61. Santa Barbara, CA: Journal
Publishing Affiliates, 1976a.
________. “The Schema as a Solution to Some Persistent Problems in Motor Learning

Theory.” In Motor Control: Issues and Trends, ed. G. E. Stelmach, 41-65. New
York: Academic Press, 1976b.
________. “Past and Future Issues in Motor Programming.” Research Quarterly for
Exercise and Sport 51 (1980): 122-40.
________. “More on Motor Programs.” In Human Motor Behavior, ed. J. A. S. Kelso,

189-217. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1982a.
________. Motor Control and Learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1982b.
________. “The Schema Concept.” In Human Motor Behavior, ed. J. A. S. Kelso, 219-
35. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1982c.
________. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis, 2nd ed. Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics, 1988.
Schmidt, R. A., H. N. Zelaznik, B. Hawkins, J. S. Frank and J. T. Quinn Jr. “Motor

Output Variability: A Theory for the Accuracy of Rapid Motor Acts.” Psychological
Review 86 (1979): 415-51.
Schmidt, R. A. and T. D. Lee. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis, 3rd
ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999.
Schneider, P. M. Scherg, H. G. Dosch, H. J. Specht, A. Gutschalk, and A. Rupp.

“Morphology of Heschl’s Gyrus Reflects Enhanced Activation in the Auditory Cortex
of Musicians.” Nature Neuroscience 5 (2002): 688-94.
Schneider, R. J., D. P. Friedman, and M. Mishkin. “A Modality-Specific Somato-

Sensory Area Within the Insula of the Rhesus Monkey.” Brain Research 621 (1993):
116-20.
Schneider, W. and Shiffrin, R. M. “Controlled and Automatic Human Information

Processing: I. Detection, Search, and Attention.” Psychological Review 84 (1977):
1-66.
192
Schön, D., C. Magne, and M. Besson. “The Music of Speech: Music Training Facilitates
Pitch Processing in Both Music and Language.” Psychophysiology 41(3) (2004):
341-9.
Schön, D., C. Semenza, and G. Denes. “Naming of Musical Notes: A Selective Deficit
in One Musical Clef.” Cortex 37 (2001): 407-21.
Schön, D., and M. Besson. “Processing Pitch and Duration in Music Reading: A RT-
ERP Study.” Neuropsychologia 40 (2002a): 868-78.
________. “Visually Induced Auditory Expectancy in Music Reading: a

Behavioral and Electrophysiological Study.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
17(4) (April 2005): 694-705.
Schöner, G. and J. A. S. Kelso. “Dynamic Pattern Generation in Behavioral and Neural

Systems.” Science 239 (1988): 1513-20.
Schöner, G., P. G. Zanone, and J. A. S. Kelso. “Learning as Change of Coordination

Dynamics: Theory and Experiment.” Journal of Motor Behavior 24 (1992): 29-48.
Schubotz, R. I. and D. Y. von Cramon. “Sequences of Abstract Nonbiological Stimuli

Share Ventral Premotor Cortex with Action Observation and Imagery.” The Journal
of Neuroscience 24 (2004): 5467-74.
Schultz, Arnold. The Riddle of the Pianist’s Finger and its Relationship to a Touch-
Scheme. New York: Fischer, 1936.
Schulze, K., E. Lüders, and L. Jäncke. “Intermanual Transfer in a Simple Motor Task.”
Cortex 38 (2002): 805-15.
Schumann, Robert. “Die Pianoforte-Etuden, ihren Zwecken nach geordnet.” Neue

Zeitschrift für Musik 4 (1836): 45-6.
________. Gesammelte Schriften über Musik und Musiker. Volume II. Leipzig:
Philipp Reclam, 1888.
Schurmann, M., T. Raij, N. Fujiki, and R. Hari. “Mind’s Ear in a Musician: Where and
When in the Brain.” NeuroImage 16 (2002): 434-40.
Secher, N. H. “Isometric Rowing Strength of Experienced and Inexperienced Oarsmen.”

Medicine and Science in Sports 7 (1975): 280-3.
193
Secher, N. H., N. Rube, and J. Ellers. “Strength of Two- and One- Leg Extension in
Man.” Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 134 (1988): 333-39.
Secher, N. J., S. Rorsgarrd, and O. Secher. “Contralateral Influence on Recruitment of

Curarized Muscle Fibres During Maximal Voluntary Extension of the Legs.” Acta
Physiologica Scandinavica 103 (1978): 456-62.
Segal, R. L., S. L. Wolf, P. A. Catlin, R. L. Gilliand, J. K. Taffs, H. C. Bass, and E. F.

Vickers. “Uncoupling of Human Short and Long Latency Stretch Reflex Responses
with Operant Conditioning.” Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 17 (2000): 17-
22.
Sekuler, R., A. B. Sekuler, and R. Lau. “Sound Alters Visual Motion Perception.”
Nature 385 (1997): 308.
Semjen, A., J. J. Summers, and D. Cattaert. “Hand Coordination in Bimanual Circle

Drawing.” Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance
21 (1995): 1139-57.
Semmler, J. B. and M. A. Nordstrom. “Motor Unit Discharge and Force Tremor in Skill-
and-Strength-Trained Individuals.” Experimental Brain Research 119(1) (1998): 27-
38.
Sergent, J., E. Zuck, S. Terriah, and B. MacDonald. “Distributed Neural Network
Underlying Musical Sight-Reading and Keyboard Performance.” Science 257 (1992):
106-9.
Serrien, D. J. and S. P. Swinnen. “Coordination Constraints Induced by Effector

Combination Under Isofrequency and Multifrequency Conditions.” Journal of
Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 23 (1997): 1493-
1510.
________. “Isofrequency and Multifrequency Coordination Patterns as a Function of the

Planes of Motion.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A50 (1997): 386-
404.
Shadmehr, R. and F. A. Mussa-Ivaldi. “A 1994 Adaptive Representation of Dynamics

During Learning of a Motor Task.” Journal of Neuroscience 14 (1994): 3208-24.
Shadmehr, R. and H. H. Holcomb. “Neural Correlates of Motor Memory Consolidation.”

Science 277 (1997): 821-25.
194
Shaffer, L. H. “Performances of Chopin, Bach and Bartok: Studies in Motor

Programming.” Cognitive Psychology 13 (1981): 326-76.
Shanks, D. R. and A. Cameron. “The Effect of Mental Practice on Performance in a

Sequential Reaction Time Task.” Journal of Motor Behavior 32 (2000): 305-13.
Shapiro, D. C. “Bilateral Transfer of a Motor Program.” Paper presented at the

AAHPER Annual Meeting, March, 1977.
Sherwood, D. E. “Distance and Location Assimilation Effects in Rapid Bimanual

Movement.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 62 (1991): 302-8.
________. “Hand Preference, Practice Order, and Spatial Assimilations in Rapid

Bimanual Movement.” Journal of Motor Behavior 26 (1994): 123-34.
Siegel, J. A. and W. Siegel. “Absolute Identification of Notes and Intervals by

Musicians.” Perceptual and Psychophysics 21(2) (1977): 143-52.
Simon, H. A. and W. G. Chase. “Skill in Chess.” American Scientist 61 (1973): 394-

403.
Singer, R. N., R. Lidor, and J. H. Cauraugh. “To be Aware or Not Aware? What to
Think About While Learning and Performing a Motor Skill.” The Sport Psychologist
7 (1993): 19-30.
Sloboda, J. A. “Visual Perception of Musical Notation: Registering Pitch Symbols in

Memory.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 28 (1976): 1-16.
________. “Psychology of Music Reading.” Psychology of Music 6 (1978): 3-20.
________. “Experimental Studies of Musical Reading: A Review.” Music Perception 2

(1984): 222-36.
________. Review of Language, Music, and Mind, by Diana Raffman. Mind &
Language 9 (1994): 377-85.
Sloboda, J. A., J. W. Davidson, M. J. A. Howe, and D. G. Moore. “The Role of Practice

in the Development of Performing Music.” British Journal of Psychology 87 (1996):
287-309.
195
Slobounov, S., H. Chiang, J. Johnston, and W. Ray. “Modulated Cortical Control of

Individual Fingers in Experienced Musicians: An EEG Study.” Clinical
Sluming, V., T. Barrick, M. Howard, E. Cezayirli, A. Mayes, and N. Roberts. “Voxel-

Based Morphometry Reveals Increased Gray Matter Density in Broca’s Area in Male
Symphony Orchestra Musicians.” NeuroImage 17 (2002): 1613-22.
Smith, M. D. and C. J. Chamberlin. “Effect of Adding Cognitively Demanding Tasks on

Soccer Skill Performance.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 75 (1992): 955-61.
Sober, Samuel J. and Philip N. Sabes. “Flexible Strategies for Sensory Integration
During Motor Planning.” Nature Neuroscience 8(4) (2005): 490-97.
Sosniak, L. A. “Learning to be a Concert Pianist.” In Developing Talent in Young

People, ed. B.S. Bloom, 19-67. New York: Balantine Books, 1985.
Spijkers, W. and H. Heuer. “Structural Constraints on the Performance of Symmetrical

Bimanual Movements with Different Amplitudes.” Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology A48 (1995): 716-40.
Stålberg, E. and P. R. Fawcett. “Macro EMG in Healthy Subjects of Different Ages.”

45(10) (1982): 870-8.
Starkes, J. L. “Skill in Field Hockey: The Nature of the Cognitive Advantage.” Journal
of Sport Psychology 9 (1987): 146-60.
Starkes, J. L. and J. M. Deakin. “Perception in Sport: A Cognitive Approach to Skilled

Performance.” In Cognitive Sport Psychology, ed. W. F. Straub and J. M. Williams,
115-28. Lansing, NY: Sport Science Associates, 1984.
Starkes, J. L., J. M. Deakin, F. Allard, N. J. Hodges, and A. Hayes. “Deliberate Practice

in Sports: What is it Anyway?” In The Road to Excellence: The Acquisition of
Expert Performance in the Arts, Sciences, Sports and Games, ed. K. A. Ericsson, 80-
106. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996.
Staron, R. S., E. S. Malicky, M. J. Leonardi, J. E. Falkel, F. C. Hagerman, and G. A.

Dudley. “Muscle Hypertrophy and Fast Fiber Type Conversions in Heavy Resistance-
Trained Women.” European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational
Physiology 60 (1990): 71-9.
196
Stromswold, K., D. Caplan, N. Alpert, and S. Rauch. “Localization of Syntactic

Comprehension by Positron Emission Tomography.” Brain and Language 52 (1996):
452-73.
Summers, J. “Motor Programs.” In Human Skills, ed. D.H. Holding, 41-64. New York:
John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 1981.
________. “Learning and Transfer of Multifrequency Patterns.” In Rhythm Perception

and Production, ed. P. Desain and L. Windsor, 69-80. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger,
2000.
________. “Practice and Training in Bimanual Coordination Tasks: Strategies and

Constraints.” Brain and Cognition 48 (2002): 166-78.
Summers, J. J., A. Semen, R. A. Carson, and J. Thomas. “Going Around in Circles: The
Dynamics of Bimanual Circle Drawing.” In Motor Control and Sensory Motor
Integration, ed. D. Glencross and J. Piek, 231-53. Amsterdam: North-Holland,
1995).
Summers, J. J., A. Todd, and Y. H. Kim. “The Influence of Perceptual and Motor
Factors on Bimanual Coordination in a Polyrhythmic Tapping Task.” Psychological
Research 55 (1993): 107-15.
Summers, J., D. A. Rosenbaum, B. D. Burns, and S. K. Ford. “Production of

Polyrhythms.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance 19(2) (1993b): 416-28.
Summers, J. J. and T. Kennedy. “Strategies in the Production of a 5:3 Polyrhythm.”

Human Movement Science 11 (1992): 101-12.
Sundberg J., and R. T. Verrillo. “Somatosensory Feedback in Musical Performance.”

Music Perception 9(3) (Spring 1992): 275-83.
Susman, L. “Fossil Evidence for Early Hominid Tool Use.” Science 265 (1994): 1570-
3.
________. “Hand Function and Tool Behavior in Early Hominids.” Journal of Human
Evolution 35 (1998): 23-46.
Sutton, R. and A. G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press, 1998.
197
Suzuki, W. A. and D. G. Amaral. “Perirhinal and Parahippocampal Cortices of the

Macaque Monkey: Cortical Afferents.” Journal of Comparative Neurology 350
(1994): 497-533.
Svensson, P., A. Romaniello, L. Arendt-Nielsen, and B. J. Sessle. “Plasticity in

Corticomotor Control of the Human Tongue Musculature Induced by Tongue-Task
Training.” Experimental Brain Research 152 (2003): 42-51.
Swinnen, S. P. “Age-Related Deficits in Motor Learning and Differences in Feedback

Processing During the Production of a Bimanual Coordination Pattern.” Cognitive
Neuropsychology 15 (1998): 439-66.
________. “Intermanual Coordination: From Behavioural Principles to Neural-Network

Interactions.” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 3 (2002): 350-61.
Swinnen, S. P. and C. B. Walter. “Constraints in Coordinating Limb Movements.” In

Cognition and Action in Skilled Behaviour, ed. A. M. Colley and J. R. Beech, 127-43.
Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1988.
Swinnen, S. P., C. B. Walter, T. D. Lee, and D. J. Serrien. “Acquiring Bimanual Skills:

Contrasting Forms of Information Feedback for Interlimb Decoupling.” Journal of
Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 19 (1993): 1328-44.
Swinnen, S. P., D. E. Young, C. B. Walter, and D. J. Serrien. “Control of Bilateral

Asymmetrical Movements.” Experimental Brain Research 85 (1991): 163-73.
Swinnen, S. P. and K. Jardin. “Egocentric and Allocentric Constraints in the Expression

of Patterns of Interlimb Coordination.” Journal of Cognitive. Neuroscience 9 (1997):
348–77.
Swinnen, S. P., K. Jardin, S. Verschueren, and R. Meulenbroek. “Exploring Interlimb

Constraints During Bimanual Graphic Performance: Effects of Muscle Grouping and
Direction.” Behavioural Brain Research 90 (1998): 79–87.
Swinnen, S. P., N. Dounskaia, C. B. Walter, and D. J. Serrien. “Preferred and Induced

Coordination Modes During the Acquisition of Bimanual Movements with a 2:1
Frequency Ratio.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance 23 (1997): 1087-1110.
198
Swinnen, S. P., N. Dounskaia, S. Verschueren, D. J. Serrien, and A. Daelman. “Relative

Phase Destabilization During Interlimb Coordination: The Disruptive Role of
Kinesthetic Afferences Induced by Passive Movement.” Experimental Brain
Research 105 (1995): 439-54.
Tamada, T., S. Miyauchi, H. Imamizu, T. Yoshioka, and M. Kawato. “Cerebro-

Cerebellar Functional Connectivity Revealed by the Laterality Index in Tool-Use
Learning.” NeuroReport 10 (1999): 325-31.
Tanji, J. “New Concepts of the Supplementary Motor Area.” Current Opinion in

Neurobiology 6 (1996): 782-7.
Tanji, J. and K. Shima. “Role for Supplementary Motor Area Cells in Planning Several
Movements Ahead.” Nature 371 (1994): 413-16.
Tanji, J. and M. Kato. “Firing Rate of Individual Motor Units in Voluntary Contraction
of Abductor Digit Minimi Muscle in Man.” Experimental Neurology 40 (1973): 771-
83.
Tanosaki, Masato, Isao Hashimoto, Yoshinobu Iguchi, Tomoaki Kimura, Ryosuke

Takino, Yuji Kurobe, Yasuhiro Haruta, and Yoko Hoshi. “Specific Somatosensory
Processing in Somatosensory Area 3b for Human Thumb: A Neuromagnetic Study.”
Clinical Neurophysiology 112 (2001): 1516-22.
Taylor, H. G. and K. M. Heilman. “Left-Hemisphere Motor Dominance in

Righthanders.” Cortex 16 (1980): 587-603.
Teasdale, N., C. Bard, M. Fleury, J. Paillard, R. Forget, and Y. Lamarre. “Bimanual

Interference in a Deafferented Patient and in Control Subjects.” In Interlimb
Coordination: Neural, Dynamical, and Cognitive Constraints, ed. S. P. Swinnen, H.
Heuer, J. Massion, and P. Casner, 243-58. San Diego: Academic Press, 1994.
Teixeira, L. A. “Timing and Force Components in Bilateral Transfer of Learning.”

Brain and Cognition 44 (2000): 455-69.
Temprado, J., A. Monno, P. Zanone, and J. Kelso. “Attentional Demands Reflect

Learning-Induced Alterations of Bimanual Coordination Dynamics.” European
Temprado, J. J., P. G. Zanone, A. Monno, and M. Laurent. “Attentional Load Associated

with Performing and Stabilizing Preferred Bimanual Patterns.” Journal of
Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 25 (1999): 1579–94.
199
Tenenbaum, G. and M. Bar-Eli. “Decision-Making in Sport: A Cognitive Perspective.”

In Handbook of Research on Sports Psychology, eds. R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, and
L. K. Tennant, 171-92. New York: Macmillan, 1993.
Thach, W. T. “A Role for the Cerebellum in Learning Movement Coordination.”

Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 7 (1998): 177-88.
Theiler, A. M. and L. G. Lippman. “Effects of Mental Practice and Modeling on Guitar

and Vocal Performance.” Journal of General Psychology 122 (1995): 329-43.
Thelen, E., G. Bradshaw, and J. A. Ward. “Spontaneous Kicking in Month-Old Infants:

Manifestation of a Human Central Locomotor Program.” Behavioral and Neural
Biology 32 (1981): 45-53.
Théoret, H. and A. Pascual-Leone. “Language Acquisition: Do as You Hear.” Current

Biology 12 (2002): R736-7.
Toni, I., M. Krams, R. Turner, and R. E. Passingham. “The Time Course of Changes
During Motor Sequence Learning: A Whole-Brain fMRI Study.” NeuroImage 8
(1998): 50-61.
Treffner, P. J. and M. Peter. “Intentional and Attentional Dynamics of Speech-Hand

Coordination.” Human Movement Science 21 (2002): 641-97.
Treffner, P. J. and M. T. Turvey. “Resonance Constraints on Rhythmic Movements.”

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 19(6)
(1993): 1221-37.
________. “Handedness and the Asymmetric Dynamics of Bimanual Rhythmic

Coordination.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance 23(1) (1997): 1-15.
Tresch, M. C., P. Saltiel, and E. Bizzi. “The Construction of Movement by the Spinal
Cord.” Nature Neuroscience 2 (1999): 162-7.
Tsuji, K. and Y. Ide. “Development of Bilateral Transfer Skills in the Mirror Tracing.”
Japanese Psychological Research 16 (1974): 171-8.
Tuller, B. and J. A. S. Kelso. “Environmentally-Specified Patterns of Movement

Coordination in Normal and Split-Brain Subjects.” Experimental Brain Research 75
(1989): 306-16.
200
Tyc, F., A. Boyadjian, and H. Devanne. “Motor Cortex Plasticity Induced by Extensive
Training Revealed by Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Human.” The European
Ullen, F., H. Borssberg, and H. H. Ehrsson. “Neural Networks for the Coordination of
the Hands in Time.” Journal of Neurophysiology 89 (2003): 1126-35.
Ullyot, Marianne. “Chopin and Liszt: A Legacy of Teaching.” Journal of the American
Liszt Society 10 (1981): 39-42.
Umiltà, M. A., E. Kohler, V. Gallese, L. Fogassi, L. Fadiga, C. Keysers, and G.

Rizzolatti. “I Know What You Are Doing. A Neurophysiological Study.” Neuron
31(1) (2001): 155-65.
Ung, R. V., M. A. Imbeault, C. Ethier, L. Brizzi, and C. Capaday. “On the Potential Role
of the Corticospinal Tract in the Control and Progressive Adaptation of the Soleus H-
Reflex During Backward Walking.” Journal of Neurophysiology 94 (2005): 1133-42.
Ungerleider, L. G., J. Doyon, and A. Karni. “Imaging Brain Plasticity During Motor
Skill Learning.” Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 78(3) (2002): 553-64.
Van Beers, R. J., A. C. Sittig, and J. J. Denier van der Gon. “How Humans Combine
Simultaneous Proprioceptive and Visual Position Information.” Experimental Brain
Research 111 (1996): 253-61.
________. “Integration of Proprioceptive and Visual Position-Information: An

Experimentally Supported Model.” Journal of Neurophysiology 81 (1999): 1355-64.
Van Cutsem, M., J. Duchateau, and K. Hainuat. “Changes in Single Motor Unit
Behavior Contribute to the Increase in Contraction Speed After Dynamic Training in
Humans.” Journal of Physiology 513 (1998): 295-305.
Vandell, R. A., R. A. Davis, and N. A. Clugston. “Function of Mental Practice in the

Acquisition of Motor Skills.” Journal of General Psychology 29 (1943): 243-50.
Vandervoort, A. A., D. G. Sale, and J. Moroz. “Comparison of Motor Unit Activation

During Unilateral and Bilateral Leg Extension.” Journal of Applied Physiology 56
(1984): 46-51.
VanLehn, K. “Problem Solving and Cognitive Skill Acquisition.” In Foundations of

Cognitive Science, ed. M. Posner, 527-80. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989.
201
Varela, F., J. P. Lachaux, E. Rodriguez, and J. Martinerie. “The Brainweb: Phase

Synchronization and Large-Scale Integration.” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 2
(2001): 229-39.
Vercher, Jean-Louis, Frédéric Sarès, Jean Blouin, Christophe Bourdin, and Gabriel
Gathier. “Role of Sensory Information in Updating Internal Models of the Effector
During Arm Tracking.” Progress in Brain Research (142) (2003): 203-22.
Verschueren, S. M. P., S. P. Swinnen, P. J. Cordo, and N. V. Dounskaia. “Proprioceptive

Control of Multijoint Movement: Bimanual Circle Drawing.” Experimental Brain
Research 127 (1999): 182-92.
Vitzthum, V. J. “A Number No Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts: The Use and Abuse
of Heritability.” Human Biology 75 (2003): 539-88.
Vogt, B. A. and M. Gabriel, ed. Neurobiology of Cingulate Cortex and Limbic

Thalamus. Boston: Birkhauser, 1993.
Vogt, B. A., D. M. Finch, and C. R. Olson. “Functional Heterogeneity in Cingulate

Cortex: The Anterior Executive and Posterior Evaluative Regions.” Cerebral Cortex
2 (1992): 435-43.
Vokaer, M., J. C. Bier, S. Elincx, T. Claes, P. Paquier, S. Goldman, E. J. Bartholomé, and

M. Pandolfo. “The Cerebellum May be Directly Involved in Cognitive Functions.”
Neurology 58 (2002): 967-70.
von Holst, E. “Relations Between the Central Nervous System and the Peripheral
Organs.” British Journal of Animal Behaviour 2 (1954): 89-94.
Vorberg, D. and R. Hambuch. “On the Temporal Control of Rhythmic Performance.” In

Attention and Performance VII, ed. J. Requin, 535-55. Hillsdale, NJ; Erlbaum, 1978.
________. “Timing of Two-Handed Rhythmic Performance.” In Timing and Time

Perception, ed. L. Allen, 390-406. New York: New York Academy of Sciences,
1984.
Wallingford, R. “Long Distance Running.” In The Scientific Aspects of Sports Training,

ed. A.W. Tayler and F. Landry, 118-30. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1975.
202
Walter, C. B. and S. P. Swinnen. “The Formation and Dissolution of “Bad Habits”

During the Acquisition of Coordination Skills.” In Interlimb Coordination: Neural,
Dynamical, and Cognitive Constraints, ed. S. P. Swinnen, H. Heuer, J. Massion, and
P. Casaer, 491-513. San Diego: Academic Press, 1994.
Walter, C. B., S. P. Swinnen, N. Dounskaia, and H. Van Langendonk. “Systematic Error

in the Hierarchical Organization of Physical Action.” Cognitive Science 25 (2001):
393-422.
Wang, Y., S. Pillai, J. R. Wolpaw, and X. Y. Chen. “Motor Learning Changes

GABAergic Terminals on Spinal Motoneurons in Normal Rats.” European Journal of
Neuroscience 23 (2006): 141-50.
Wannier, T., C. Bastiaanse, G. Colombo, and V. Dietz. “Arm to Leg Coordination in

Humans During Walking, Creeping and Swimming.” Experimental Brain Research
14 (2001): 375-9.
Warren, D. H. “Response Factors in Intermodality Localization Under Conflict

Conditions.” Perception and Psychophysics 27 (1980): 28-32.
Warren, D. H. and W. T. Cleaves. “Visual-Proprioceptive Interaction Under Large

Amounts of Conflict.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 90 (1971): 206-14.
Warrier, C. M. and R. J. Zatorre. “Right Temporal Cortex is Critical for Utilization of

Melodic Contextual Cues in a Pitch Constancy Task.” Brain 127 (2004): 1616-25.
Watkins, K. and T. Paus. “Modulation of Motor Excitability During Speech Perception:

The Role of Broca’s Area.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16(6) (2004): 978-87.
Watkins, K. E., A. P. Strafella, and T. Paus. “Seeing and Hearing Speech Excites the
Motor System Involved in Speech Production.” Neuropsychologia 41 (2003): 989-
94.
Weig, E. “Bilateral Transfer in the Motor Learning of Young Children and Adults.”
Child Development 3 (1932): 247-67.
Welford, A.T. Fundamentals of Skill. London: Methuen, 1968.
Whiteside, Abby. Indispensables of Piano Playing. New York: Coleman-Ross Co.,

1955.
203
________. Mastering the Chopin Etudes and Other Essays. Edited by Joseph Prostakoff
and Sophia Rosoff. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969.
Williamson, D. L., P. M. Gallagher, C. C. Carroll, U. Raue, and S. W. Trappe.

“Reduction in Hybrid Single Muscle Fiber Proportions with Resistance Training in
Humans.” Journal of Applied Physiology 91 (2001): 1955-61.
Wilson, D. M. “The Central Nervous Control of Flight in a Locust.” Journal of

Experimental Biology 38 (1961): 471-90.
Wilson, E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press, 1975.
Wing, A. M. “Voluntary Timing and Brain Function: An Information Processing

Approach.” Brain Cognition 48 (2002): 7-30.
Wing, A. M. and A. B. Kristofferson. “Response Delays and the Timing of Discrete

Motor Responses.” Perception & Psychophysics 14(1) (1973a): 5-12.
________. “The Timing of Inter-Response Intervals.” Perception & Psychophysics

13(3) (1973b): 455-60.
Wohldmann, E. L., A. F. Healy, and L. E. Bourne Jr. “Pushing the Limits of

Imagination: Mental Practice for Learning Sequences.” Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33(1) (2007): 254-61.
Wohlschlager, A. and H. Bekkering. “Is Human Imitation Based on a Mirror-Neurone

System? Some Behavioural Evidence.” Experimental Brain Research 143 (2002):
335-41.
Wolpert, D. M. “Computational Approaches to Motor Control.” Trends in Cognitive

Sciences 1(6) (1997): 209-16.
Wolpert, D. M. and M. Kawato. “Multiple Paired Forward and Inverse Models for Motor
Control.” Neural Networks 11 (1998): 1317-29.
Wolpert, D. M., R. C. Miall, and M. Kawato. “Internal Models in the Cerebellum.”

Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2(9) (1998): 338-47.
Wolpert, D. M. and Z. Ghahramani. “Computational Principles of Movement

Neuroscience.” Nature Neuroscience 3 (2000): 1212-17.
204
Wolpert, D. M., Z. Ghahramani, and J. R. Flanagan. “Perspectives and Problems in

Motor Learning.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15(11) (2001): 487-94.
Wolpert, D. M., Z. Ghahramani, and M. I. Jordan. “An Internal Model for Sensorimotor
Integration.” Science 269 (1995): 1880-2.
Woodworth, R. S. and H. Schlosberg, eds. Experimental Psychology. New York: Holt,

Rinehart & Winston, 1954.
Wright, B. Z. and M. B. Fitzgerald. “The Time Course of Attention in a Simple Auditory

Detection Task.” Perception & Psychophysics 66 (2004): 508-16.
Wu, T., K. Kansaku, and M. Hallett. “How Self-Initiated Memorized Movements

Become Automatic: A Functional MRI Study.” Journal of Neurophysiology 91(4)
(2004): 1690-8.
Wulf, G., M. Hob, and W. Prinz. “Instructions for Motor Learning: Differential Effects
of Internal Versus External Focus of Attention.” Journal of Motor Behavior 30
(1998): 169-79.
Wulf, G, N. H. McNevin, T. Fuchs, F. Ritter, and T. Toole. “Attentional Focus in

Complex Skill Learning.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 71 (2000):
229-39.
Yágüez, L., A. G. Canavan, H. W. Lange, and V. Hömberg. “A Mental Route to Motor

Learning: Improving Trajectorial Kinematics Through Imagery Training.”
Behavioural Brain Research 90(1) (1998): 95-106.
Yamanishi, J., M. Kawato, R. Suzuki. “Two Coupled Oscillators as a Model for the
Coordinated Finger Tapping by Both Hands.” Biological Cybernetics 37 (1980):
219–25.
Yang, N., D. G. MacArthur, J. P. Gulbin, A. G. Han, A. H. Beggs, S. Easteal, and K.

Northe. “ACTN3 Genotype is Associated with Human Elite Athletic Performance.”
American Journal of Human Genetics 73 (2003): 627-31.
Yao, W., R. Fuglevand, and R. Enoka. “Motor-Unit Synchronization Increases EMG

Amplitude and Decreases Force Steadiness of Simulated Contractions.” The Journal
of Neurophysiology 83(1) (2000): 441-52.
205
Yoo, S. S., C. U. Lee, and B. G. Choi. “Human Brain Mapping of Auditory Imagery:
Event-Related Functional MRI Study.” NeuroReport 12(14) (2001): 3045-9.
Young, D. E. and R. A. Schmidt. “Transfer of Movement Control in Motor Skill

Learning.” In Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Applications, ed. S.
M. Cornier and J. D. Hagman, 47-79. San Diego, Academic Press, 1987.
Yue, G. and K. J. Cole. “Strength Increases From the Motor Program: Comparison of
Training with Maximum Voluntary and Imagined Muscle Contractions.” Journal of
Zanone, P. and J. Kelso. “The Evolution of Behavioral Attractors with Learning—

Nonequilibrium Phase-Transitions.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance 18 (1992): 403-21.
________. “Coordination Dynamics of Learning and Transfer: Collective and

Component Levels.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance 23 (1997): 1454-80.
Zatorre, R. J. “Discrimination and Recognition of Tonal Melodies After Unilateral

Cerebral Excisions.” Neuropsychologia 23 (1985): 31-41.
________. “Neural Specialization for Tonal Processing.” In The Cognitive

Neuroscience of Music, ed. I. Peretz and R. Zatorre, 231-46. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2003.
________. “When the Brain Plays Music: Auditory-Motor Interactions in Music

Perception and Production.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8(7) (2007): 547-58.
Zatorre, R. J., A. C. Evans, and E. Meyer.” Neural Mechanisms Underlying Melodic

Perception and Memory for Pitch.” Journal of Neuroscience 14 (1994): 1908-19.
Zatorre, R. J. and A. R. Halpern. “Mental Concerts: Musical Imagery and Auditory

Cortex.” Neuron 47 (2005): 9-12.
Zatorre, R. J., A. R. Halpern, D. W. Perry, E. Meyer, and A. C. Evans. “Hearing in the

Mind’s Ear: A PET Investigation of Musical Imagery and Perception.” Journal of
Cognitive Neuroscience 8 (1996): 29-46.
Zatorre, R. J., D. W. Perry, C. A. Beckett, C. F. Westbury, and A. C. Evans. “Functional

Anatomy of Musical Processing in Listeners with Absolute Pitch and Relative Pitch.”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 95 (1998): 3172-77.
206
Zatorre, R. J. and P. Belin. “Spectral and Temporal Processing in Human Auditory

Cortex.” Cerebral Cortex 11 (2001): 946-53.
Ziemann, U. W. Muellbacher, M. Hallett, and L. G. Cohen. “Modulation of Practice-

Dependent Plasticity in Human Motor Cortex.” Brain 124(Pt6) (2001): 1171-81.
Zilles, K., G. Schlaug, M. Matelli, G. Luppino, A. Schleider, and M. Qü, A. Dabringhaus,

R. Seitz, and P. E. Roland. “Mapping of Human and Macaque Sensorimotor Areas
by Integrating Architectonic, Transmitter Receptor, MRI and PET Data.” Journal of
Anatomy 187 (1995): 515-37.
Zupan, L. H., D. M. Merfeld, and C. Darlot. “Using Sensory Weighting to Model the
Influence of Canal, Otolith and Visual Cues on Spatial Orientation and Eye
Movements.” Biological Cybernetics 86 (2002): 2009-30.

Strategies For Performing Etudes Chopin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategies For Performing Etudes Chopin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTEGRATING PIANO TECHNIQUE, PHYSIOLOGY, AND MOTOR LEARNING:

STRATEGIES FOR PERFORMING THE CHOPIN ETUDES

A Document Submitted to the Faculty of the

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

prepared by Tracy D. Lipke-Perry entitled, “Integrating Piano Technique, Physiology,

_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

_______________________________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

________________________________________________ Date: 6/9/08

This document has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an

SIGNED: Tracy D. Lipke-Perry

CHAPTER 1: HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY PIANO

ETUDE: TECHNICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL DEVELOPMENTS......................... 13

Exercises, Etudes, and Concert Studies...................................................................... 13

The Rise of the Nineteenth-Century Piano Etude ....................................................... 14

The Chopin Etudes .................................................................................................... 15

Piano Technique and Philosophical Changes: The Nineteenth and Twentieth

CHAPTER 2: CHOPIN’S TEACHING PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY....... 21

General Principles: Technique Building.................................................................... 21

Scales and arpeggios.............................................................................................. 21

Chopin and Psychological Processes Involved in Playing the Piano........................... 23

CHAPTER 3: THE NEUROMUSCULAR SYSTEM, HAND PHYSIOLOGY, AND

PIANO PRACTICE AND PERFORMANCE: AN OVERVIEW OF SELECT

The Nature-Nurture Debate ....................................................................................... 25

Skill Training and the Central Nervous System.......................................................... 28

Neural Plasticity .................................................................................................... 29

Motor Cortex ..................................................................................................... 31

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Spinal Mechanisms ............................................................................................ 34

Motor Units ....................................................................................................... 35

Hand Physiology ....................................................................................................... 39

Skeletal Muscles and Motor Units.......................................................................... 39

Structural Differences Within Individual Muscle Fibers..................................... 40

Physiology of Movement Control .............................................................................. 41

Exercise Training and Maximal Velocity (Vmax)................................................. 41

Force and Efficiency.......................................................................................... 44

Two-joint and multi-joint muscles.................................................................. 44

Bilateral deficit .............................................................................................. 44

The Fingers and Thumb............................................................................................. 45

The Thumb ............................................................................................................ 47

Pianists and Hand Physiology.................................................................................... 49

CHAPTER 4: SKILL ACQUISITON: SENSORIMOTOR LEARNING ..................... 51

Stages of Learning, Specificity of Practice, and Feedback...................................... 52

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Auditory Feedback ................................................................................................ 53

Visual Feedback .................................................................................................... 55

Audio-Motor Coupling .......................................................................................... 57

Music and Mental Rehearsal...................................................................................... 67

Visual Imagery ...................................................................................................... 70

Imagery, Performance, and Brain Activity................................................................. 76

Motor Learning and the Human Hand........................................................................ 82

Handedness and Facility of the Non-Dominant Hand............................................. 82

Modes of Interlimb Coordination ....................................................................... 85

Finger Tapping and Polyrhythms ....................................................................... 88

Bi-manual Transfer ............................................................................................ 90

Musical Skills and Acquisition of New Coordination Patterns............................ 94

CHAPTER 5: THE CHOPIN ETUDES AND SKILL ACQUISITION......................... 98

KK II b/3 Nr. 2 .......................................................................................................... 98

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued