ArticleScientific reports2017
Unravelling the contributions of motor experience and conceptual knowledge in action perception: A training study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence for the dominance of visual-perceptual mechanisms of action prediction following isolated and sequential visual and motor practice.Psychological research · 2025Article
- From Infancy to Childhood: A Comprehensive Review of Event- and Task-Related Brain Oscillations.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- The Impact of Limited Previous Motor Experience on Action Possibility Judgments in People with Spinal Muscle Atrophy.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Tool use acquisition induces a multifunctional interference effect during object processing: evidence from the sensorimotor mu rhythm.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Reduced Mu Power in Response to Unusual Actions Is Context-Dependent in 1-Year-Olds.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
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
Prior knowledge affects how we perceive the world and the sensorimotor system actively guides our perception. An ongoing dispute regards the extent to which prior motor knowledge versus conceptual knowledge modulates the observation of others' actions. Research indicates that motor experience increases motor activation during action perception. Other research, however, has shown that conceptual familiarity with actions also modulates motor activation, i.e., increased motor activation during observation of unfamiliar, compared to conceptually familiar, actions. To begin to disentangle motor from conceptual contributions to action perception, we uniquely combined motoric and conceptual interventions into one design. We experimentally manipulated participants' experience with both motoric skills and conceptual knowledge, via motor training of kinematically challenging actions and contextual information about the action, respectively, in a week-long training session. Measurements of the effects on motor activity measured via electroencephalography (EEG) during pre- and post-training action observation were compared. We found distinct, non-interacting effects of both manipulations: Motor training increased motor activation, whereas additional conceptual knowledge decreased motor activation. The findings indicate that both factors influence action perception in a distinct and parallel manner. This research speaks to previously irreconcilable findings and provides novel insights about the distinct roles of motor and conceptual contributions to action perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.