Trial reportPloS one2019
Implicit and explicit learning in reactive and voluntary saccade adaptation.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Implicit motor sequence learning using three-dimensional reaching movements with the non-dominant left arm.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Interaction of dynamic error signals in saccade adaptation.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Article
- Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation Does Not Affect Implicit Sensorimotor Adaptation: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Vision as oculomotor reward: cognitive contributions to the dynamic control of saccadic eye movements.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2021Review
- Implicit motor learning within three trials.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Saccades can either be elicited automatically by salient peripheral stimuli or can additionally depend on explicit cognitive goals. Similarly, it is thought that motor adaptation is driven by the combination of a more automatic, implicit process and a more explicit, cognitive process. However, the degree to which such implicit and explicit learning contribute to the adaptation of more reactive and voluntary saccades remains elusive. To study this question, we employed a global saccadic adaptation paradigm with both increasing and decreasing saccade amplitudes. We assessed the resulting adaptation using a dual state model of motor adaptation. This model decomposes learning into a fast and slow process, which are thought to constitute explicit and implicit learning, respectively. Our results show that adaptation of reactive saccades is equally driven by fast and slow learning, while fast learning is nearly absent when adapting voluntary (i.e. scanning) saccades. This pattern of results was present both when saccade gain was increased or decreased. Our results suggest that the increased cognitive demands associated with voluntary compared to reactive saccade planning interfere specifically with explicit learning.
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.