Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32206850›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2020

Motor timing training improves sustained attention performance but not fluid intelligence: near but not far transfer.

Olympia Karampela, Guy Madison, Linus Holm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Olympia KarampelaDepartment of Psychology, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Guy MadisonDepartment of Psychology, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5366-1169
Linus HolmDepartment of Psychology, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden. linus.holm@umu.se.

Funding

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas (SE) 421-2011-1917
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Associations between cognitive and motor timing performance are documented in hundreds of studies. A core finding is a correlation of about - 0.3 to - 0.5 between psychometric intelligence and time interval production variability and reaction time, but the nature of the relationship remains unclear. Here, we investigated whether this relation is subject to near and far transfer across a battery of cognitive and timing tasks. These tasks were administered pre- and post-five daily 30 min sessions of sensorimotor synchronization training with feedback for every interval. The training group exhibited increased sustained attention performance in Conners' Continuous Performance Test II, but no change in the block design and figure weights subtests from the WAIS-IV. A passive control group exhibited no change in performance on any of the timing or cognitive tests. These findings provide evidence for a direct involvement of sustained attention in motor timing as well as near transfer from synchronization to unpaced serial interval production. Implications for the timing-cognition relationship are discussed in light of various putative timing mechanisms.

Indexed as

Practice, PsychologicalAdultAttentionFeedback, SensoryFemaleHumansIntelligenceMaleNeuropsychological TestsPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeTime PerceptionTransfer, PsychologyWechsler ScalesYoung AdultCognitionIntelligenceLearningMotor timingNear transferSensorimotor synchronizationSustained attentionTappingTransferWAIS

Identifiers

PMID32206850
PMCPMC7181559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.