ArticlePloS one2020
Quantifying exploration in reward-based motor learning.
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 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring motor variability in adults with severe athetoid or ataxic cerebral palsy: Impact on error-based and reward-based learning.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Indirect feedback hinders explicit sensorimotor adaptation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Success-efficient/failure-safe strategy for hierarchical reinforcement motor learning.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Roles and interplay of reinforcement-based and error-based processes during reaching and gait in neurotypical adults and individuals with Parkinson's disease.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Motor adaptation is reduced by symbolic compared to sensory feedback.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Punishment Leads to Greater Sensorimotor Learning But Less Movement Variability Compared to Reward.Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Reinforcement Learning during Locomotion.eNeuro · 2024Article
- Reinforcement-based processes actively regulate motor exploration along redundant solution manifolds.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Shaping Exploration: How Does the Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Helps Patients Finding a New Movement Solution.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2022Article
- The online and offline effects of changing movement timing variability during training on a finger-opposition task.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Parental praise and children's exploration: a virtual reality experiment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Clustering analysis of movement kinematics in reinforcement learning.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Modulation of neural activity in frontopolar cortex drives reward-based motor learning.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Impaired Refinement of Kinematic Variability in Huntington Disease Mice on an Automated Home Cage Forelimb Motor Task.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Pitfalls in quantifying exploration in reward-based motor learning and how to avoid them.Biological cybernetics · 2021Article
- Virtual Training of Endurance Cycling - A Summary of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2021Article
- Introducing the PLOS ONE Collection on the neuroscience of reward and decision making.PloS one · 2020Article
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
Exploration in reward-based motor learning is observable in experimental data as increased variability. In order to quantify exploration, we compare three methods for estimating other sources of variability: sensorimotor noise. We use a task in which participants could receive stochastic binary reward feedback following a target-directed weight shift. Participants first performed six baseline blocks without feedback, and next twenty blocks alternating with and without feedback. Variability was assessed based on trial-to-trial changes in movement endpoint. We estimated sensorimotor noise by the median squared trial-to-trial change in movement endpoint for trials in which no exploration is expected. We identified three types of such trials: trials in baseline blocks, trials in the blocks without feedback, and rewarded trials in the blocks with feedback. We estimated exploration by the median squared trial-to-trial change following non-rewarded trials minus sensorimotor noise. As expected, variability was larger following non-rewarded trials than following rewarded trials. This indicates that our reward-based weight-shifting task successfully induced exploration. Most importantly, our three estimates of sensorimotor noise differed: the estimate based on rewarded trials was significantly lower than the estimates based on the two types of trials without feedback. Consequently, the estimates of exploration also differed. We conclude that the quantification of exploration depends critically on the type of trials used to estimate sensorimotor noise. We recommend the use of variability following rewarded trials.
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.