ArticleFrontiers in psychology2017
Implicit and Explicit Knowledge Both Improve Dual Task Performance in a Continuous Pursuit Tracking Task.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of varying cursor latency on visuomotor tracking.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Motor sequences resist automatization as attentional demands increase with sequence learning.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Sensitivity to Instruction Strategies in Motor Learning Is Predicted by Anterior-Posterior TMS Motor Thresholds.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- The information gain of explicitly provided over self-generated contextual knowledge for behavioral control.PloS one · 2025Article
- cpCST: a new continuous performance test for high-precision assessment of attention across the lifespan.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Representationalism can connect neuroscience and philosophy.Frontiers in cognition · 2025Review
- A kinematically complex multi-articular motor skill for investigating implicit motor learning.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Language switching is modulated by emotion priming: evidence from behavioral and event-related potentials study.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- TRACK-a new algorithm and open-source tool for the analysis of pursuit-tracking sensorimotor integration processes.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Neurofunctional correlates of a neurorehabilitation system based on eye movements in chronic stroke impairment levels: A pilot study.Brain and behavior · 2023Article
- The neurophysiology of continuous action monitoring.iScience · 2023Article
- The association of executive functions and physical fitness with cognitive-motor multitasking in a street crossing scenario.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Neuro-Computational Model for Discrete-Continuous Dual-Task Process.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- Minimal interplay between explicit knowledge, dynamics of learning and temporal expectations in different, complex uni- and multisensory contexts.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021Article
- No impact of instructions and feedback on task integration in motor learning.Memory & cognition · 2021Article
- Why Does Dual-Tasking Hamper Implicit Sequence Learning?Journal of cognition · 2021Article
- Ways to Improve Multitasking: Effects of Predictability after Single- and Dual-Task Training.Journal of cognition · 2021Article
- The impact of predictability on dual-task performance and implications for resource-sharing accounts.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- Sensorimotor delays in tracking may be compensated by negative feedback control of motion-extrapolated position.Experimental brain research · 2021Article
- Additive Effects of Prior Knowledge and Predictive Visual Information in Improving Continuous Tracking Performance.Journal of 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of this study was to investigate the effect of predictability on dual-task performance in a continuous tracking task. Participants practiced either informed (explicit group) or uninformed (implicit group) about a repeated segment in the curves they had to track. In Experiment 1 participants practices the tracking task only, dual-task performance was assessed after by combining the tracking task with an auditory reaction time task. Results showed both groups learned equally well and tracking performance on a predictable segment in the dual-task condition was better than on random segments. However, reaction times did not benefit from a predictable tracking segment. To investigate the effect of learning under dual-task situation participants in Experiment 2 practiced the tracking task while simultaneously performing the auditory reaction time task. No learning of the repeated segment could be demonstrated for either group during the training blocks, in contrast to the test-block and retention test, where participants performed better on the repeated segment in both dual-task and single-task conditions. Only the explicit group improved from test-block to retention test. As in Experiment 1, reaction times while tracking a predictable segment were no better than reaction times while tracking a random segment. We concluded that predictability has a positive effect only on the predictable task itself possibly because of a task-shielding mechanism. For dual-task training there seems to be an initial negative effect of explicit instructions, possibly because of fatigue, but the advantage of explicit instructions was demonstrated in a retention test. This might be due to the explicit memory system informing or aiding the implicit memory system.
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.