ArticlePloS one2019
Motor learning without moving: Proprioceptive and predictive hand localization after passive visuoproprioceptive discrepancy training.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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.
- Perceptual prediction error supports implicit process in motor learning.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Timing of responses to gradual and abrupt visuo-proprioceptive cue conflict with and without feedback.Journal of neurophysiology · 2025Article
- The Somatosensory Cortex and Body Representation: Updating the Motor System during a Visuoproprioceptive Cue Conflict.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- The role of explicit knowledge in compensating for a visuo-proprioceptive cue conflict.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Article
- Distinct learning, retention, and generalization patterns in de novo learning versus motor adaptation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Proprioceptive short-term memory in passive motor learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effect of visuo-proprioceptive mismatch rate on recalibration in hand perception.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Visuo-proprioceptive recalibration and the sensorimotor map.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Article
- Retention of visuo-proprioceptive recalibration in estimating hand position.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effects of guided exploration on reaching measures of auditory peripersonal space.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Implicit motor learning within three trials.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- External error attribution dampens efferent-based predictions but not proprioceptive changes in hand localization.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- The effect of age on visuomotor learning processes.PloS one · 2020Article
- Early stages of sensorimotor map acquisition: learning with free exploration, without active movement or global structure.Journal of neurophysiology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An accurate estimate of limb position is necessary for movement planning, before and after motor learning. Where we localize our unseen hand after a reach depends on felt hand position, or proprioception, but in studies and theories on motor adaptation this is quite often neglected in favour of predicted sensory consequences based on efference copies of motor commands. Both sources of information should contribute, so here we set out to further investigate how much of hand localization depends on proprioception and how much on predicted sensory consequences. We use a training paradigm combining robot controlled hand movements with rotated visual feedback that eliminates the possibility to update predicted sensory consequences ('exposure training'), but still recalibrates proprioception, as well as a classic training paradigm with self-generated movements in another set of participants. After each kind of training we measure participants' hand location estimates based on both efference-based predictions and afferent proprioceptive signals with self-generated hand movements ('active localization') as well as based on proprioception only with robot-generated movements ('passive localization'). In the exposure training group, we find indistinguishable shifts in passive and active hand localization, but after classic training, active localization shifts more than passive, indicating a contribution from updated predicted sensory consequences. Both changes in open-loop reaches and hand localization are only slightly smaller after exposure training as compared to after classic training, confirming that proprioception plays a large role in estimating limb position and in planning movements, even after adaptation. (data: https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/zfdth, preprint: https://doi.org/10.1101/384941).
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.