ArticleNPJ science of learning2024
Body-part specificity for learning of multiple prior distributions in human coincidence timing.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 2024. 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.
- Concomitant motor responses facilitate the acquisition of multiple timing priors beyond upper-limb contexts.iScience · 2026Article
- Concomitant motor responses facilitate the acquisition of multiple prior distributions in human coincidence timing.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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
Abstract
During timing tasks, the brain learns the statistical distribution of target intervals and integrates this prior knowledge with sensory inputs to optimise task performance. Daily events can have different temporal statistics (e.g., fastball/slowball in baseball batting), making it important to learn and retain multiple priors. However, the rules governing this process are not yet understood. Here, we demonstrate that the learning of multiple prior distributions in a coincidence timing task is characterised by body-part specificity. In our experiments, two prior distributions (short and long intervals) were imposed on participants. When using only one body part for timing responses, regardless of the priors, participants learned a single prior by generalising over the two distributions. However, when the two priors were assigned to different body parts, participants concurrently learned the two independent priors. Moreover, body-part specific prior acquisition was faster when the priors were assigned to anatomically distant body parts (e.g., hand/foot) than when they were assigned to close body parts (e.g., index/middle fingers). This suggests that the body-part specific learning of priors is organised according to somatotopy.
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.