Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36469052›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2023

When intercepting moving targets, mid-movement error corrections reflect distinct responses to visual and haptic perturbations.

Pablo Gonzalez Polanco, Leigh A Mrotek, Kristy A Nielson, Scott A Beardsley, Robert A Scheidt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Pablo Gonzalez PolancoBiomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Olin Engineering Center Rm 206, 1515 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53233, USA.
Leigh A MrotekBiomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Olin Engineering Center Rm 206, 1515 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53233, USA.
Kristy A NielsonPsychology, Marquette University and Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, 53233, USA.
Scott A BeardsleyBiomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Olin Engineering Center Rm 206, 1515 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53233, USA.
Robert A ScheidtBiomedical Engineering, Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin, Olin Engineering Center Rm 206, 1515 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53233, USA. scheidt@ieee.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2024-5051

Funding

Neural mechanisms of error correction during manual interception of moving targetsR21NS121624 · NINDS · MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY · PI SCHEIDT, ROBERT A. · 2021 to 2021
$421k
NINDS NIH HHS R21 NS121624NINDS NIH HHS R21NS121624
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examined a key aspect of sensorimotor skill: the capability to correct performance errors that arise mid-movement. Participants grasped the handle of a robot that imposed a nominal viscous resistance to hand movement. They watched a target move pseudo-randomly just above the horizontal plane of hand motion and initiated quick interception movements when cued. On some trials, the robot's viscosity or the target's speed changed without warning coincident with the GO cue. We fit a sum-of-Gaussians model to mechanical power measured at the handle to determine the number, magnitude, and relative timing of submovements occurring in each interception attempt. When a single submovement successfully intercepted the target, capture times averaged 410 ms. Sometimes, two or more submovements were required. Initial error corrections typically occurred before feedback could indicate the target had been captured or missed. Error corrections occurred sooner after movement onset in response to mechanical viscosity increases (at 154 ms) than to unprovoked errors on control trials (215 ms). Corrections occurred later (272 ms) in response to viscosity decreases. The latency of corrections for target speed changes did not differ from those in control trials. Remarkably, these early error corrections accommodated the altered testing conditions; speed/viscosity increases elicited more vigorous corrections than in control trials with unprovoked errors; speed/viscosity decreases elicited less vigorous corrections. These results suggest that the brain monitors and predicts the outcome of evolving movements, rapidly infers causes of mid-movement errors, and plans and executes corrections-all within 300 ms of movement onset.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionPsychomotor PerformanceHandHaptic TechnologyHumansMovementHand powerInterceptionOnline feedbackTarget speed

Identifiers

PMID36469052
PMCPMC10440829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.