Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36936001›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Does aging amplify the rule-based efficiency effect in action selection?

Jean P P Scheib, Sarah E M Stoll, Jennifer Randerath

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jean P P ScheibDepartment of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Sarah E M StollDepartment of Psychology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Jennifer RanderathLurija Institute for Rehabilitation Science and Health Research, Kliniken Schmieder, Allensbach, Germany.
Kliniken Schmieder · DEUniversity of Konstanz · DEUniversity of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When it comes to the selection of adequate movements, people may apply varying strategies. Explicit if-then rules, compared to implicit prospective action planning, can facilitate action selection in young healthy adults. But aging alters cognitive processes. It is unknown whether older adults may similarly, profit from a rule-based approach to action selection. To investigate the potential effects of aging, the Rule/Plan Motor Cognition (RPMC) paradigm was applied to three different age groups between 31 and 90 years of age. Participants selected grips either instructed by a rule or by prospective planning. As a function of age, we found a general increase in a strategy-specific advantage as quantified by the difference in reaction time between plan- and rule-based action selection. However, in older age groups, these differences went in both directions: some participants initiated rule-based action selection faster, while for others, plan-based action selection seemed more efficient. The decomposition of reaction times into speed of the decision process, action encoding, and response caution components suggests that rule-based action selection may reduce action encoding demands in all age groups. There appears a tendency for the younger and middle age groups to have a speed advantage in the rule task when it comes to information accumulation for action selection. Thus, one influential factor determining the robustness of the rule-based efficiency effect across the lifespan may be presented by the reduced speed of information uptake. Future studies need to further specify the role of these parameters for efficient action selection.

Indexed as

action planningaction selectiondrift diffusionend-state comfortimplementation intentionsmotor cognition

Identifiers

PMID36936001
PMCPMC10014753
OpenAlexW4322744311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read7
reference markers read3
identifiers read1
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.