ArticleExperimental brain research2016
Drawing ellipses in water: evidence for dynamic constraints in the relation between velocity and path curvature.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current status of mathematical foundations of the Gestalt concepts in psychophysics.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Article
- The effect of the preferred hand on drawing movement.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Separating neural influences from peripheral mechanics: the speed-curvature relation in mechanically constrained actions.Journal of neurophysiology · 2020Article
- Do bumblebees have signatures? Demonstrating the existence of a speed-curvature power law in Bombus terrestris locomotion patterns.PloS one · 2020Article
- The speed-curvature power law of movements: a reappraisal.Experimental brain research · 2018Article
- The power law of movement: an example of a behavioral illusion.Experimental brain research · 2017Article
- The speed-curvature power law in Drosophila larval locomotion.Biology letters · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several types of continuous human movements comply with the so-called Two-Thirds Power Law (2/3-PL) stating that velocity (V) is a power function of the radius of curvature (R) of the endpoint trajectory. The origin of the 2/3-PL has been the object of much debate. An experiment investigated further this issue by comparing two-dimensional drawing movements performed in air and water. In both conditions, participants traced continuously quasi-elliptic trajectories (period T = 1.5 s). Other experimental factors were the movement plane (horizontal/vertical), and whether the movement was performed free-hand, or by following the edge of a template. In all cases a power function provided a good approximation to the V-R relation. The main result was that the exponent of the power function in water was significantly smaller than in air. This appears incompatible with the idea that the power relationship depends only on kinematic constraints and suggests a significant contribution of dynamic factors. We argue that a satisfactory explanation of the observed behavior must take into account the interplay between the properties of the central motor commands and the visco-elastic nature of the mechanical plant that implements the commands.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26838360What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.