ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2018
Movement kinematics drive chain selection toward intention detection.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic population coding of kinematic structure across executed and observed actions in primate premotor cortex.Science advances · 2026Article
- The embodied digital divide: how sensorimotor experience shapes touchscreen typing performance and strategy.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Mobile Typing as a Window into Sensorimotor and Cognitive Function.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Reading out bodily cues to predict interactions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Motor styles in action: Developing a computational framework for operationalization of motor distances.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Contextual Priors Shape Action Understanding before and beyond the Unfolding of Movement Kinematics.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Action prediction in psychosis.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Visuo-motor interference is modulated by task interactivity: A kinematic study.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- Kinematic priming of action predictions.Current biology : CB · 2023Article
- How the conception of control influences our understanding of actions.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2023Review
- Interception of virtual throws reveals predictive skills based on the visual processing of throwing kinematics.iScience · 2022Article
- Developmental Coordination Disorder: State of the Art and Future Directions from a Neurophysiological Perspective.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Adults Do Not Distinguish Action Intentions Based on Movement Kinematics Presented in Naturalistic Settings.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Motor Recruitment during Action Observation: Effect of Interindividual Differences in Action Strategy.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2020Article
- Stereotyped, automatized and habitual behaviours: are they similar constructs under the control of the same cerebral areas?AIMS neuroscience · 2020Review
- Contextual priors do not modulate action prediction in children with autism.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Differential neural dynamics underling pragmatic and semantic affordance processing in macaque ventral premotor cortex.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Low or High-Level Motor Coding? The Role of Stimulus Complexity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2019Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to understand intentions based on another's movements is crucial for human interaction. This ability has been ascribed to the so-called motor chaining mechanism: anytime a motor chain is activated (e.g., grasp-to-drink), the observer attributes to the agent the corresponding intention (i.e., to drink) from the first motor act (i.e., the grasp). However, the mechanisms by which a specific chain is selected in the observer remain poorly understood. In the current study, we investigate the possibility that in the absence of discriminative contextual cues, slight kinematic variations in the observed grasp inform mapping to the most probable chain. Chaining of motor acts predicts that, in a sequential grasping task (e.g., grasp-to-drink), electromyographic (EMG) components that are required for the final act [e.g., the mouth-opening mylohyoid (MH) muscle] show anticipatory activation. To test this prediction, we used MH EMG, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS; MH motor-evoked potentials), and predictive models of movement kinematics to measure the level and timing of MH activation during the execution (Experiment 1) and the observation (Experiment 2) of reach-to-grasp actions. We found that MH-related corticobulbar excitability during grasping observation varied as a function of the goal (to drink or to pour) and the kinematics of the observed grasp. These results show that subtle changes in movement kinematics drive the selection of the most probable motor chain, allowing the observer to link an observed act to the agent's intention.
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.