ArticleeNeuro
Action Costs Rapidly and Automatically Interfere with Reward-Based Decision-Making in a Reaching Task.
Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid dopaminergic signatures in movement: Reach vigor reflects reward prediction error and learned expectation.Science advances · 2026Article
- Humans take into account the consequences of motor control demands when making perceptual decisions between actions.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Rapid Dopaminergic Signatures in Movement: Reach Vigor Reflects Reward Prediction Error and Learned Expectation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Cross-Modal Transfer Effects of the Go/No-Go Training With Visual Stimuli.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Biomechanical costs influence decisions made during ongoing actions.Journal of neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Dual-tasking modulates movement speed but not value-based choices during walking.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task.Psychological research · 2023Article
- Embodied decision biases: individually stable across different tasks?Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Adversarial inference: predictive minds in the attention economy.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2023Article
- Embodied decisions during walking.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Article
- The Cost of Imagined Actions in a Reward-Valuation Task.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Article
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
It is widely assumed that we select actions we value the most. While the influence of rewards on decision-making has been extensively studied, evidence regarding the influence of motor costs is scarce. Specifically, how and when motor costs are integrated in the decision process is unclear. Twenty-two right-handed human participants performed a reward-based target selection task by reaching with their right arm toward one of two visual targets. Targets were positioned in different directions according to biomechanical preference, such that one target was systematically associated with a lower motor cost than the other. Only one of the two targets was rewarded, either in a congruent or incongruent manner with respect to the associated motor cost. A timed-response paradigm was used to manipulate participants' reaction times (RT). Results showed that when the rewarded target carried the highest motor cost, movements produced at short RT (<350 ms) were deviated toward the other (i.e., non-rewarded, low-cost (LC) target). In this context participants needed an additional 150-ms delay to reach the same percentage of rewarded trials as when the LC target was rewarded. Crucially, motor costs affected the total earnings of participants. These results demonstrate a robust interference of motor costs in a simple reward-based decision-making task. They point to the rapid and automatic integration of motor costs at an early stage of processing, potentially through the direct modulation of competing action representations in parieto-frontal regions. The progressive overcoming of this bias with increasing RT is likely achieved through top-down signaling pertaining to expected rewards.
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.