ArticlePeerJ2024
Space-time mapping relationships in sensorimotor communication during asymmetric joint action.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sensorimotor communication is frequently observed in complex joint actions and social interactions. However, it remains challenging to explore the cognitive foundations behind sensorimotor communication. Methods: The present study extends previous research by introducing a single-person baseline condition and formulates two distinct categories of asymmetric joint action tasks: distance tasks and orientation tasks. This research investigates the action performance of 65 participants under various experimental conditions utilizing a 2 (cooperative intention: Coop, No-coop) × 2 (task characteristic: distance, orientation) × 4 (target: T1, T2, T3, T4) repeated-measures experimental design to investigate the cognitive mechanisms underlying sensorimotor communication between individuals. Results: The results showed that (1) target key dwell time, motion time, total motion time, and maximum motion height in the Coop condition are more than in the No-coop condition. (2) In the distance task without cooperative intention, the dwell time of T4 is smaller than T1, T2, T3, and its variability of T1, T2, T3, and T4 were no different. In the distance task with cooperative intention, the dwell time and its variability of T1, T2, T3, and T4 displayed an increasing trend. (3) In the orientation task without cooperative intention, the dwell time of T1 is smaller than T2, T3, T4, and variability of the target keys T1, T2, T3, and T4 had no difference. In the orientation task with cooperative intention, the dwell time and variability of the target keys T1, T2, T3, and T4 had increasing trends. Conclusions: Those findings underscore the importance of cooperative intention for sensorimotor communication. In the distance task with cooperative intention, message senders establish a mapping relationship characterized by "near-small, far-large" between the task distance and the individual's action characteristics through sensorimotor experience. In the orientation task with cooperative intention, message senders combined sensorimotor experience and verbal metaphors to establish a mapping relationship between task orientation and action characteristics, following the sequence of "left-up, right-up, left-down, right-down" to transmit the message to others.
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.