ArticlePloS one2020
Single versus dual-rate learning when exposed to Coriolis forces during reaching movements.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gradual exposure to Coriolis force induces sensorimotor adaptation with no change in peripersonal space.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When we reach for an object during a passive whole body rotation, a tangential Coriolis force is generated on the arm. Yet, within a few trials, the brain adapts to this force so it does not disrupt the reach. Is this adaptation governed by a single-rate or dual-rate learning process? Here, guided by state-space modeling, we studied human reach adaptation in a fully-enclosed rotating room. After 90 pre-rotation reaches (baseline), participants were trained to make 240 to-and-fro reaches while the room rotated at 10 rpm (block A), then performed 6 reaches under opposite room rotation (block B), and subsequently made 100 post-rotation reaches (washout). A control group performed the same paradigm, but without the reaches during rotation block B. Single-rate and dual-rate models can be best dissociated if there would be full un-learning of compensation A during block B, but minimal learning of B. From the perspective of a dual-rate model, the un-learning observed in block B would mainly be caused by the faster state, such that the washout reaches would show retention effects of the slower state, called spontaneous recovery. Alternatively, following a single-rate model, the same state would govern the learning in block A and un-learning in block B, such that the washout reaches mimic the baseline reaches. Our results do not provide clear signs of spontaneous recovery in the washout reaches. Model fits further show that a single-rate process outperformed a dual-rate process. We suggest that a single-rate process underlies Coriolis force reach adaptation, perhaps because these forces relate to familiar body dynamics and are assigned to an internal cause.
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.