ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Sensorimotor adaptation impedes perturbation detection in grasping.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The contribution of audition and proprioception in unisensory and multisensory target reaching.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans achieve skilled actions by continuously correcting for motor errors or perceptual misjudgments, a process called sensorimotor adaptation. This can occur with the actor both detecting (explicitly) and not detecting the error (implicitly). We investigated how the magnitude of a perturbation and the corresponding error signal each contribute to the detection of a size perturbation during interaction with real-world objects. Participants grasped cuboids of different lengths in a mirror-setup allowing us to present different sizes for seen and felt cuboids, respectively. Visuo-haptic size mismatches (perturbations) were introduced either abruptly or followed a sinusoidal schedule. These schedules dissociated the error signal from the visuo-haptic mismatch: Participants could fully adapt their grip and reduce the error when a perturbation was introduced abruptly and then stayed the same, but not with a constantly changing sinusoidal perturbation. We compared participants' performance in a two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) task where participants judged these mismatches, and modelled error-correction in grasping movements by looking at changes in maximum grip apertures, measured using motion tracking. We found similar mismatch-detection performance with sinusoidal perturbation schedules and the first trial after an abrupt change, but decreasing performance over further trials for the latter. This is consistent with the idea that reduced error signals following adaptation make it harder to detect perturbations. Error-correction parameters indicated stronger error-correction in abruptly introduced perturbations. However, we saw no correlation between error-correction and overall mismatch-detection performance. This emphasizes the distinct contributions of the perturbation magnitude and the error signal in helping participants detect sensory perturbations.
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.