ArticleeNeuro
Humans Can Track But Fail to Predict Accelerating Objects.
Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changing speed along the mental line: A SNARC-like effect for visual acceleration.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- The earlier you know, the smoother you act: anticipatory control in solo and dyadic juggling.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictive interception across speed profiles.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2026Article
- Visual factors that determine sensory uncertainty in rapid interceptive hand movements.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Target interception in virtual reality is better for natural versus unnatural trajectory shapes and orientations.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Anticipatory smooth pursuit eye movements scale with the probability of visual motion: The role of target speed and acceleration.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Reasoning decline during aging under familiar and unfamiliar physics.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Rapid eye and hand responses in an interception task are differentially modulated by context-dependent predictability.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Article
- Spatial contextual cues that help predict how a target will accelerate can be used to guide interception.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Article
- Trial-by-trial feedback fails to improve the consideration of acceleration in visual time-to-collision estimation.PloS one · 2023Article
- Oculomotor markers of functional impairment in traumatic brain injury using simple and predictive visual tracking.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objects in our visual environment often move unpredictably and can suddenly speed up or slow down. The ability to account for acceleration when interacting with moving objects can be critical for survival. Here, we investigate how human observers track an accelerating target with their eyes and predict its time of reappearance after a temporal occlusion by making an interceptive hand movement. Before occlusion, observers smoothly tracked the accelerating target with their eyes. At the time of occlusion, observers made a predictive saccade to the location where they subsequently intercepted the target with a quick pointing movement. We tested how observers integrated target motion information by comparing three alternative models that describe time-to-contact (TTC) based on the (1) final target velocity sample before occlusion, (2) average target velocity before occlusion, or (3) final target velocity and the rate of target acceleration. We show that observers were able to accurately track the accelerating target with visually-guided smooth pursuit eye movements. However, the timing of the predictive saccade and manual interception revealed inability to act on target acceleration when predicting TTC. Instead, interception timing was best described by the final velocity model that relies on extrapolating the last available target velocity sample before occlusion. Moreover, predictive saccades and manual interception showed similar insensitivity to target acceleration and were correlated on a trial-by-trial basis. These findings provide compelling evidence for the failure of integrating target acceleration into predictive models of target motion that drive both interceptive eye and hand movements.
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.