ArticleExperimental brain research2017
Memory-guided force control in healthy younger and older adults.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Age-related differences in recall and recognition: a meta-analysis.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Influence of the Inter-Trial Interval, Movement Observation, and Hand Dominance on the Previous Trial Effect.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Shared neural recruitment across working memory and motor control tasks as a function of task difficulty and age.Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Successful performance of a memory-guided motor task requires participants to store and then recall an accurate representation of the motor goal. Further, participants must monitor motor output to make adjustments in the absence of visual feedback. The goal of this study was to examine memory-guided grip force in healthy younger and older adults and compare it to performance on behavioral tasks of working memory. Previous work demonstrates that healthy adults decrease force output as a function of time when visual feedback is not available. We hypothesized that older adults would decrease force output at a faster rate than younger adults, due to age-related deficits in working memory. Two groups of participants, younger adults (YA: N = 32, mean age 21.5 years) and older adults (OA: N = 33, mean age 69.3 years), completed four 20-s trials of isometric force with their index finger and thumb, equal to 25% of their maximum voluntary contraction. In the full-vision condition, visual feedback was available for the duration of the trial. In the no vision condition, visual feedback was removed for the last 12 s of each trial. Participants were asked to maintain constant force output in the absence of visual feedback. Participants also completed tasks of word recall and recognition and visuospatial working memory. Counter to our predictions, when visual feedback was removed, younger adults decreased force at a faster rate compared to older adults and the rate of decay was not associated with behavioral performance on tests of working memory.
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.