Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37519900›Full record

ArticleiScience2023

Motor variability modulates calibration of precisely timed movements.

Nadine Schlichting, Clara Fritz, Eckart Zimmermann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Actions as perceptual experiments.Journal of vision · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Nadine SchlichtingInstitute for Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf 40225, Germany.
Clara FritzInstitute for Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf 40225, Germany.
Eckart ZimmermannInstitute for Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf 40225, Germany.

Funding

European Research Council 757184
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interacting with the environment often requires precisely timed movements, challenging the brain to minimize the detrimental impact of neural noise. Recent research demonstrates that the brain exploits the variability of its temporal estimates and recalibrates perception accordingly. Time-critical movements, however, contain a sensory measurement and a motor stage. The brain must have knowledge of both in order to avoid maladapted behavior. By manipulating sensory and motor variability, we show that the sensorimotor system recalibrates sensory and motor uncertainty separately. Serial dependencies between observed interval durations in the previous and motor reproductions in the current trial were weighted by the variability of movements. These serial dependencies generalized across different effectors, but not to a visual discrimination task. Our results suggest that the brain has accurate knowledge about contributions of motor uncertainty to errors in temporal movements. This knowledge about motor uncertainty seems to be processed separately from knowledge about sensory uncertainty.

Indexed as

Behavioral neuroscienceCognitive neuroscienceSensory neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID37519900
PMCPMC10384242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.