ArticlePloS one2020
The effect of hand motion and object orientation on the automatic detection of orientation: A visual mismatch negativity study.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- N170 Amplitude to Rare Neutral Faces in an Oddball Condition Reflects Prediction Error.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the effects of voluntary hand movements and continuously present objects on the automatic detection of deviant stimuli in a passive oddball paradigm. The visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) component of event-related potentials (ERPs) was measured as the index of automatic deviant detection. The stimuli were textures consisting of parallel, oblique bars with frequent (standard) and infrequent (deviant) orientation. Traditional vMMN was measured by the difference between ERPs to frequent (standard) and infrequent (deviant) textures. Additionally, we measured 'genuine' vMMN by comparing the ERPs to deviant and control textures in the equal probability procedure. Compatible and incompatible hand movement directions to the standard texture had no influence on 'traditional' vMMN and elicited no 'genuine' vMMN. However, the deviant texture elicited 'genuine' vMMN if the orientation of a continuously present rectangle was different from the standard (and identical to the deviant) texture orientation. Our results suggest that the direction of voluntary hand movement and the orientation of task-irrelevant visual patterns do not acquire common memory representation, but a continuously present object contributes to the detection of sequential regularity violation.
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.