ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2024
Reinforcement learning in motor skill acquisition: using the reward positivity to understand the mechanisms underlying short- and long-term behavior adaptation.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: According to reinforcement learning, humans adjust their behavior based on the difference between actual and anticipated outcomes (i.e., prediction error) with the main goal of maximizing rewards through their actions. Despite offering a strong theoretical framework to understand how we acquire motor skills, very few studies have investigated reinforcement learning predictions and its underlying mechanisms in motor skill acquisition. Methods: In the present study, we explored a 134-person dataset consisting of learners' feedback-evoked brain activity (reward positivity; RewP) and motor accuracy during the practice phase and delayed retention test to investigate whether these variables interacted according to reinforcement learning predictions. Results: Results showed a non-linear relationship between RewP and trial accuracy, which was moderated by the learners' performance level. Specifically, high-performing learners were more sensitive to violations in reward expectations compared to low-performing learners, likely because they developed a stronger representation of the skill and were able to rely on more stable outcome predictions. Furthermore, contrary to our prediction, the average RewP during acquisition did not predict performance on the delayed retention test. Discussion: Together, these findings support the use of reinforcement learning models to understand short-term behavior adaptation and highlight the complexity of the motor skill consolidation process, which would benefit from a multi-mechanistic approach to further our understanding of this phenomenon.
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.