Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36706115›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Does hand proximity enhance letter identification?

Giordana Grossi, Annie J Olmstead, Danielle Lukaszewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

3 authors.

Giordana GrossiDepartment of Psychology, State University of New York at New Paltz, New Paltz, New York, United States of America.
Annie J OlmsteadDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3686-5922
Danielle LukaszewskiDepartment of Psychology, State University of New York at New Paltz, New Paltz, New York, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adam et al. (2012) found that letters were identified more accurately when presented near, compared to away from, the hands. Participants performed the task in two conditions: with their hands held stationary and with their hands moving towards and away from the target letters. The near-hands effect included the contribution of both static and dynamic trials. Further studies showed that accuracy in letter discrimination was higher when hands were away from a target (a far-hands effect) and moving toward it, suggesting an interaction between hand position and movement direction. The present study aimed to test whether hand proximity affects letter identification when the hands are stationary, as it remains unclear if this effect can be reliably observed. Participants viewed strings of three consonants, briefly presented and masked, and had to verbally report their identity. Stimuli were presented under two different hand conditions: proximal and distal. The predicted effects of letter position and stimulus duration were all statistically significant and robust; however, we did not observe a hand proximity effect.

Indexed as

HandMovementHumans

Identifiers

PMID36706115
PMCPMC9882917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.