ArticleScientific reports2023
Optimism persists when walking in unpredictable environments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prior uncertainty impedes discrete locomotor adaptation.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans continuously modulate their control strategies during walking based on their ability to anticipate disturbances. However, how people adapt and use motor plans to create stable walking in unpredictable environments is not well understood. Our purpose was to investigate how people adapt motor plans when walking in a novel and unpredictable environment. We evaluated the whole-body center of mass (COM) trajectory of participants as they performed repetitions of a discrete goal-directed walking task during which a laterally-directed force field was applied to the COM. The force field was proportional in magnitude to forward walking velocity and randomly directed towards either the right or left each trial. We hypothesized that people would adapt a control strategy to reduce the COM lateral deviations created by the unpredictable force field. In support of our hypothesis, we found that with practice the magnitude of COM lateral deviation was reduced by 28% (force field left) and 44% (force field right). Participants adapted two distinct unilateral strategies, implemented regardless of if the force field was applied to the right or to the left, that collectively created a bilateral resistance to the unpredictable force field. These strategies included an anticipatory postural adjustment to resist against forces applied to the left, and a more lateral first step to resist against forces applied to the right. In addition, during catch trials when the force field was unexpectedly removed, participants exhibited trajectories similar to baseline trials. These findings were consistent with an impedance control strategy that provides a robust resistance to unpredictable perturbations. However, we also found evidence that participants made predictive adaptations in response to their immediate experience that persisted for three trials. Due to the unpredictable nature of the force field, this predictive strategy would sometimes result in greater lateral deviations when the prediction was incorrect. The presence of these competing control strategies may have long term benefits by allowing the nervous system to identify the best overall control strategy to use in a novel environment.
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.