ArticleScientific reports2023
A common timing mechanism across different millisecond domains: evidence from perceptual and motor tasks.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The equilibrium point hypothesis revisited: why threshold control does not explain human movement.Experimental brain research · 2026Review
- Time to inhibit: P300 amplitude differences in individuals with high and low temporal efficiency.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
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
Temporal information processing (TIP) constitutes a complex construct that underlies many cognitive functions and operates in a few hierarchically ordered time domains. This study aimed to verify the relationship between the tens of milliseconds and hundreds of milliseconds domains, referring to perceptual and motor timing, respectively. Sixty four young healthy individuals participated in this study. They underwent two auditory temporal order judgement tasks to assess their performance in the tens of milliseconds domain; on this basis, groups of high-level performers (HLP) and low-level performers (LLP) were identified. Then, a maximum tapping task was used to evaluate performance in the hundreds of milliseconds domain. The most remarkable result was that HLP achieved a faster tapping rate and synchronised quicker with their "internal clock" during the tapping task than did LLP. This result shows that there is a relationship between accuracy in judging temporally asynchronous stimuli and ability to achieve and maintain the pace of a movement adequate to one's internal pacemaker. This could indicate the strong contribution of a common timing mechanism, responsible for temporal organisation and coordination of behaviours across different millisecond domains.
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.