ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2020
Reaching decisions during ongoing movements.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- How visual context influences lateral stepping regulation while walking on winding paths.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Comparing drift-diffusion modeling and finger tracking as a window into decision-making in handball penalty situations.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- The continuous dynamics of planning and acting in a virtually embodied task.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Editorial: Neural mechanisms of sensory-motor integration in manual tasks.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Continuous dynamics of cooperation and competition in social decision-making.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Humans take into account the consequences of motor control demands when making perceptual decisions between actions.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Online Movements Reflect Ongoing Deliberation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Picking the right piece: Action intentions shape visual search and action planning in human multi-target-foraging.iScience · 2025Article
- Embodied decisions as active inference.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- The multisensory control of sequential actions.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Biomechanical costs influence decisions made during ongoing actions.Journal of neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Explicit effort may not influence perceptuomotor decision-making.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Self-motion perception and sequential decision-making: where are we heading?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Continuous evaluation of cost-to-go for flexible reaching control and online decisions.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Integrated control of non-motor and motor efforts during perceptual decision-making and action execution: a pilot study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Embodied decision biases: individually stable across different tasks?Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Deciding While Acting-Mid-Movement Decisions Are More Strongly Affected by Action Probability than Reward Amount.eNeuro · 2023Article
- Article
- Humans account for cognitive costs when finding shortcuts: An information-theoretic analysis of navigation.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Integrated neural dynamics of sensorimotor decisions and actions.PLoS biology · 2022Article
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
Neurophysiological studies suggest that when decisions are made between concrete actions, the selection process involves a competition between potential action representations in the same sensorimotor structures involved in executing those actions. However, it is unclear how such models can explain situations, often encountered during natural behavior, in which we make decisions while were are already engaged in performing an action. Does the process of deliberation characterized in classical studies of decision-making proceed the same way when subjects are deciding while already acting? In the present study, human subjects continuously tracked a target moving in the horizontal plane and were occasionally presented with a new target to which they could freely choose to switch at any time, whereupon it became the new tracked target. We found that the probability of choosing to switch increased with decreasing distance to the new target and increasing size of the new target relative to the tracked target, as well as when the direction to the new target was aligned (either toward or opposite) to the current tracking direction. However, contrary to our expectations, subjects did not choose targets that minimized the energetic costs of execution, as calculated by a biomechanical model of the arm. When the constraints of continuous tracking were removed in variants of the task involving point-to-point movements, the expected preference for lower cost choices was seen. These results are discussed in the context of current theories of nested feedback control, internal models of forward dynamics, and high-dimensional neural spaces.
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.