Back

The central motor command, but not the muscle afferent feedback, is necessary to perceive effort

Pageaux, B.; Bergevin, M.; Angius, L.; Mangin, T.; Lepers, R.; Marcora, S.

2026-02-07 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.02.04.703832 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Two theoretical models are proposed on the signal processed by the brain to generate the perception of effort (PE): the corollary discharge model and the afferent feedback model. To test the validity of these models, we used electromyostimulation to manipulate the magnitude of the central motor command during voluntary (high motor command), evoked (no motor command) and combined (low motor command) contractions at similar torque outputs. As electromyostimulation evokes sensory volleys to the central nervous system, it was used to evoke muscle contractions and to stimulate afferent feedback. We hypothesized that PE would reflect the magnitude of the central motor command and that evoked muscle contractions in the absence of central motor command would not elicit any PE. Twenty participants (n=10 experienced and n=10 novice with electromyostimulation) volunteered in this study. Participants reported their PE after isometric (10% and 20% MVC) and dynamic (5% and 20% MVC) voluntary, evoked, and combined contractions. For the same torque, participants reported no PE during evoked contractions, but all reported PE during voluntary contractions. Experienced but not novice participants reported lower PE during the combined than during voluntary contractions. This study questions the validity of the afferent feedback model and highlights the key role of motor command-related signals in PE generation. However, results from the novice participants during the combined contractions suggest that other factors such as inhibitory control may affect PE. Future studies should investigate the relationship between the central motor command and PE during physical tasks at various levels of complexity.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 8%
9.1%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 4%
9.1%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.3%
4
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
7.1%
5
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
6
Experimental Brain Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
7
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.6%
8
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
119 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.0%
50% of probability mass above
9
Neuroscience
88 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.7%
10
Journal of Neurophysiology
263 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
11
Frontiers in Sports and Active Living
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
12
Experimental Physiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
Human Movement Science
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
14
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.3%
15
European Journal of Applied Physiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
16
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.9%
17
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.7%
18
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
19
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.6%
20
Physiological Reports
35 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
21
Brain Research
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
22
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
23
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
24
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.9%
25
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
32 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
27
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
28
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
30
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%