Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38630752›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Affordances for throwing: An uncontrolled manifold analysis.

Timothy Bennett, Liam Thomas, Andrew D Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. 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. Article
  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.

Timothy BennettCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0000-4871-7455
Liam ThomasCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Andrew D WilsonSchool of Humanities and Social Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Movement systems are massively redundant, and there are always multiple movement solutions to any task demand; motor abundance. Movement consequently exhibits 'repetition without repetition', where movement outcomes are preserved but the kinematic details of the movement vary across repetitions. The uncontrolled manifold (UCM) concept is one of several methods that analyses movement variability with respect to task goals, to quantify repetition without repetition and test hypotheses about the control architecture producing a given abundant response to a task demand. However, like all these methods, UCM is under-constrained in how it decomposes a task and performance. In this paper, we propose and test a theoretical framework for constraining UCM analysis, specifically the perception of task-dynamical affordances. Participants threw tennis balls to hit a target set at 5m, 10m or 15m, and we performed UCM analysis on the shoulder-elbow-wrist joint angles with respect to variables derived from an affordance analysis of this task as well as more typical biomechanical variables. The affordance-based UCM analysis performed well, although data also showed thrower dynamics (effectivities) need to be accounted for as well. We discuss how the theoretical framework of affordances and affordance-based control can be connected to motor abundance methods in the future.

Indexed as

MovementShoulder JointBiomechanical PhenomenaHumans

Identifiers

PMID38630752
PMCPMC11023389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.