ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Perceptuomotor skill acquisition in a solo manual ball-and-beam task with varying accuracy requirements.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the manual ball-and-beam task, participants have to control a ball that is rolling continuously on a long and hand-held beam. Since the task can be performed individually, in a solo action setting, as well as collaboratively, in a (dyadic) joint action setting, it allows us to investigate how joint performances arise from individual performances, which we investigate in a series of interrelated studies. Here we focused on individual skill acquisition on the ball-and-beam task in the solo action setting, with the goal to characterize the behavioral dynamics that arise from learning to couple (ball motion) perception and (beam motion) action. By moving a beam extremity up and down to manipulate the beam's inclination angle, the task's objective was to roll the ball as fast as and accurately as possible between two indicated targets on the beam. Based on research into reciprocal aiming tasks, we hypothesized that the emergent dynamics of the beam's inclination angle would be constrained by the size of the targets, such that large targets would evoke a continuous beam movement strategy, while small targets would lead to a discrete beam movement strategy. 16 participants individually practiced the task in two separate six-block sessions. Each block consisted of one trial per target-size condition (small, medium and large). Overall, the number of target hits increased over trials, due to a larger range of motion of the beam's inclination angle, a stronger correlation between the ball and beam motion and a smaller variability of the beam motion. Contrary to our expectations, target size did not appreciably affect the shape of the beam movement patterns. Instead, we found stable inter-individual differences in the movement strategies adopted that were uncorrelated with the number of target hits on a trial. We concluded that multiple movement strategies may lead to success on the task, while individual skill acquisition was characterized by the refinement of behavioral dynamics that emerged in an early stage of learning. We speculate that such differences in individual strategies on the task may affect the interpersonal coordination that arises in joint-action performances on the task.
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.