Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27778048›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2017

Optimality and stability of intentional and unintentional actions: II. Motor equivalence and structure of variance.

Behnoosh Parsa, Vladimir M Zatsiorsky, Mark L Latash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Behnoosh ParsaDepartment of Kinesiology, Rec.Hall-268N, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Vladimir M ZatsiorskyDepartment of Kinesiology, Rec.Hall-268N, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Mark L LatashDepartment of Kinesiology, Rec.Hall-268N, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA. mll11@psu.edu.

Funding

THE ORGANIZATION OF A SIMPLE SYNERGYR01NS035032 · NINDS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI LATASH, MARK L · 1997 to 2015
$4.3M
PREHENSION SYNERGIESR01AR048563 · NIAMS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI LATASH, MARK L · 2003 to 2014
$3.2M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR048563NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS035032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We address the nature of unintentional changes in performance in two papers. This second paper tested hypotheses related to stability of task-specific performance variables estimated using the framework of the uncontrolled manifold (UCM) hypothesis. Our first hypothesis was that selective stability of performance variables would be observed even when the magnitudes of those variables drifted unintentionally because of the lack of visual feedback. Our second hypothesis was that stability of a variable would depend on the number of explicit task constraints. Subjects performed four-finger isometric pressing tasks that required the accurate production of a combination of total moment and total force with natural or modified finger involvement under full visual feedback, which was removed later for some or all of the salient variables. We used inter-trial analysis of variance and drifts in the space of finger forces within the UCM and within the orthogonal to the UCM space. The two variance components were used to estimate a synergy index stabilizing the force/moment combination, while the two drift components were used to estimate motor equivalent and non-motor equivalent force changes, respectively. Without visual feedback, both force and moment drifted toward lower absolute magnitudes. The non-motor equivalent component of motion in the finger force space was larger than the motor equivalent component for variables that stopped receiving visual feedback. In contrast, variables that continued to receive visual feedback showed larger motor equivalent component, compared to non-motor equivalent component, over the same time interval. These data falsified the first hypothesis; indeed, selective stabilization of a variable over the duration of a trial allows expecting comparably large motor equivalent components both with and without visual feedback. Adding a new constraint (presented as a target magnitude of middle finger force) resulted in a drop in the synergy index in support of the second hypothesis. We interpret the force drift as a natural relaxation process toward states with lower potential energy in the physical (physiological) system involved in the task. The results show that presenting sensory feedback on a performance variable makes synergies stabilizing that variable dependent on that particular sensory feedback.

Indexed as

IntentionAdultAnalysis of VarianceFeedback, SensoryFemaleFingersHumansMaleMovementPsychomotor PerformanceYoung AdultFingerForceMotor equivalenceSynergyUnintentional movement

Identifiers

PMID27778048
PMCPMC5274574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.