Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38198875›Full record

ArticleClinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Moving in response to an unseen visual stimulus.

Antonio Ivano Triggiani, Sae-Jin Lee, Kaya Scheman, Mark Hallett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. 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

4 authors.

Antonio Ivano TriggianiHuman Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Sae-Jin LeeHuman Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Kaya SchemanHuman Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Mark HallettHuman Motor Control Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: hallettm@ninds.nih.gov.

Funding

Physiology of Voluntary MovementZ01NS002669 · NINDS · NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI HALLETT, MARK A · 1985 to 2008
$2.7M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 NS002669
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWhether consciousness has a causal role in voluntary movements is not clear. Backward masking blocks a stimulus from becoming conscious, but it can trigger movement in a reaction time paradigm. We hypothesize that if backward masking is used in a choice reaction time paradigm, when the visible stimulus (S2) differs from the masked stimulus (S1), the movement will often differ from conscious intent. We did such a study employing electroencephalography (EEG) to explore the brain activity associated with this effect.

methodsTwenty healthy adults participated in a choice reaction time task with a backwardly masked stimulus and EEG. They moved right or left hand in response to the direction of an arrow. S2 was congruent or incongruent with S1. When incongruent, responses were frequently concordant with S1, with faster reaction time than when responding to S2 and thought to be a mistake.

resultsWe show that it is possible to trigger movements from the unperceived stimuli indicating consciousness is not causal since the movement was not in accord with intent. EEG showed information flow from occipital cortex to motor cortex.

conclusionsOccipital activity was the same despite response, but the parietal and frontal EEG differed. When responding to S1, the motor cortex responded as soon as information arrived, and when responding to S2, the motor cortex responded with a delay allowing for other brain processing prior to movement initiation. While the exact time of conscious recognition of S2 is not clear, when there is a response to S1, the frontal cortex signals an "error", but this is apparently too late to veto the movement. SIGNIFICANCE: While consciousness does not initiate the movement, it monitors the concordance of intent and result.

Indexed as

BrainElectroencephalographyAdultConsciousnessHumansOccipital LobeReaction TimeBackward MaskingEEGERPsMovementUnconscious

Identifiers

PMID38198875
PMCPMC10872446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.