ArticleMemory & cognition2025
What the visual system can learn from the non-dominant hand: The effect of graphomotor engagement on visual discrimination.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated that engaging in graphomotor activity for creating graphemes can enhance their subsequent visual discrimination. This suggests a positive influence of the motor system on visual learning. However, existing studies have emphasized the dominant hand, which is superiorly dexterous in fine-motor movements. This near-exclusive focus prompts the inquiry of whether the observed perceptual facilitation is a general characteristic of the motor system, or specific to pathways controlling the skilled over-trained dominant hand. Furthermore, the mechanistic underpinning of visual facilitation from graphomotor training (i.e., the individual contribution of motor activity, temporal evolution of the visual trace, variability of visual output) remain unclear. To address these questions, we assessed visual discrimination capabilities of healthy right-handed participants (N = 60) before and after graphomotor or visual training. Contrary to our initial expectation, graphomotor engagement with the non-dominant hand did not yield additional benefits to visual learning beyond those attainable through visual training alone. Moreover, graphomotor training with the non-dominant hand resulted in visual discrimination improvements comparable to those of dominant hand training, despite the inherent differences between hands in motor performance and in the amount of improvement in shape tracing throughout training. We conclude that the motor components of graphomotor activity may not be critical for visual learning of shapes through tracing activity. Instead, our results are in agreement with the symbolic theoretical account, suggesting that basic shape features required for discrimination can be acquired through visual inspection alone, providing a perspective on the improvements observed in prior studies.
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.