ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2021
Back to reality: differences in learning strategy in a simplified virtual and a real throwing task.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sports training in virtual reality with a focus on visual perception: a systematic review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
- Bridging the divide in motor learning research.Nature human behaviour · 2026Review
- Time-warping analysis for biological signals: methodology and application.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Enhancing stroke rehabilitation with whole-hand haptic rendering: development and clinical usability evaluation of a novel upper-limb rehabilitation device.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Exploring motor skill acquisition in bimanual coordination: insights from navigating a novel maze task.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Investigating and acquiring motor expertise using virtual reality.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Review
- Interception of virtual throws reveals predictive skills based on the visual processing of throwing kinematics.iScience · 2022Article
- Motor control beyond reach-how humans hit a target with a whip.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence for Assistance Systems to Bring Motor Learning Principles into Real World Motor Tasks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Towards functional robotic training: motor learning of dynamic tasks is enhanced by haptic rendering but hampered by arm weight support.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Highlights from the 30th Annual Meeting of the Society for the Neural Control of Movement.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- A Hessian-based decomposition characterizes how performance in complex motor skills depends on individual strategy and variability.PloS one · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Virtual environments have been widely used in motor neuroscience and rehabilitation, as they afford tight control of sensorimotor conditions and readily afford visual and haptic manipulations. However, typically, studies have only examined performance in the virtual testbeds, without asking how the simplified and controlled movement in the virtual environment compares to behavior in the real world. To test whether performance in the virtual environment was a valid representation of corresponding behavior in the real world, this study compared throwing in a virtual set-up with realistic throwing, where the task parameters were precisely matched. Even though the virtual task only required a horizontal single-joint arm movement, similar to many simplified movement assays in motor neuroscience, throwing accuracy and precision were significantly worse than in the real task that involved all degrees of freedom of the arm; only after 3 practice days did success rate and error reach similar levels. To gain more insight into the structure of the learning process, movement variability was decomposed into deterministic and stochastic contributions. Using the tolerance-noise-covariation decomposition method, distinct stages of learning were revealed: While tolerance was optimized first in both environments, it was higher in the virtual environment, suggesting that more familiarization and exploration was needed in the virtual task. Covariation and noise showed more contributions in the real task, indicating that subjects reached the stage of fine-tuning of variability only in the real task. These results showed that while the tasks were precisely matched, the simplified movements in the virtual environment required more time to become successful. These findings resonate with the reported problems in transfer of therapeutic benefits from virtual to real environments and alert that the use of virtual environments in research and rehabilitation needs more caution.
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.