Figure 1. The process of response binding A. One each trial, (t), a visual stimulus (s) triggers an appropriate finger response (y), in this case reflecting a RT. In the case of unbound actions, the visual perception (u), selection (w), and motor planning (x) processes are all represented as latent states that operate independently across trials. B, With training, the intermediary process of selection binds multiple motor plans together as a set. Each set of actions, τ, is triggered by the visual stimulus of the first item in the set. Subsequent actions are then internally triggered, rather than relying on external visual cues. This example shows two bound sets, a three item set followed by a two-item set. C, The autocorrelation function of RTs for bound actions (dashed line) should exhibit a significant correlation across trials, whereas unbound actions (solid line) should not exhibit a temporal autocorrelation. D, Schematic of four hypothetical voxels in cortical sensory motor networks during the execution of either the index or middling finger, with darker colors reflecting stronger movement-evoked responses. Before training, each finger representation is associated with a unique neural activation pattern. After training, the representations of bound finger movements share more activation and the neural activation patterns are more similar.