ArticleNeuropsychologia2024
Investigating the impact of early deafness on learned action-effect contingency for action linked to peripheral sensory effects.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Investigating peripheral visual processing in individuals with early auditory deprivation is a critical research area in the field of neuroscience, since it helps understanding the phenomenon of sensory adaptation and brain plasticity after sensory loss. Prior research has already demonstrated that the absence of auditory input, which is crucial to detect events occurring out of the central egocentric visual space, leads to an improved processing of visual and tactile stimuli occurring in peripheral regions of the sensory space. Nevertheless, no prior studies have explored whether such enhanced processing also takes place within the domain of action, particularly when individuals are required to perform actions that produce peripheral sensory outcomes. To test this hypothesis, we recruited 15 hearing (31 ± 3.3 years) and 15 early deaf adults (42 ± 2.6 years) for a neuro-behavioral experiment involving: 1) a behavioral task where participants executed a simple motor action (i.e., a button press) and received a visual feedback either in the center or in a peripheral region of the visual field, and 2) the electrophysiological recording of brain electrical potentials (EEG). We measured and compared neural activity preceding the motor action (the readiness potentials) and visual evoked responses (the N1 and P2 ERP components) and found that deaf individuals did not exhibit more pronounced modulation of neural responses when their motor actions resulted in peripheral visual stimuli compared to their hearing counterparts. Instead they showed a reduced modulation when visual stimuli were presented in the center. Our results suggest a redistribution of attentional resources from center to periphery in deaf individuals during sensorimotor coupling.
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.