Bach, Frank, and Kunde introduce a hypothesis that encompasses two main claims: (1) motor imagery relies primarily on representations of the perceptual effects of actions, and (2) the engagement of motor resources provides access to the specific timing, kinematic or internal bodily state that characterize an action. In this commentary, I argue that the first claim is compelling and suggest some alternatives to the second one.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.