ArticleeNeuro2025
Applied Motor Noise Affects Specific Learning Mechanisms during Short-Term Adaptation to Novel Movement Dynamics.
Article in eNeuro, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Short-term motor adaptation to novel movement dynamics has been shown to involve at least two concurrent learning processes: a slow process that responds weakly to error but retains information well and a fast process that responds strongly to error but has poor retention. This modeling framework can explain several properties of motion-dependent motor adaptation (e.g., 24 h retention). An important assumption of this computational framework is that learning is only based on the experienced movement error, and the effect of noise (either internally generated or externally applied) is not considered. We examined the respective error sensitivity by quantifying adaptation in three subject groups distinguished by the noise added to the motion-dependent perturbation. We assessed the feedforward adaptive changes in motor output and examined the adaptation rate, retention, and decay of learning. Applying a two-state modeling framework showed that the applied noise during training mainly affected the fast learning process, with the slow process largely unaffected; participants in the higher noise groups demonstrated a reduced force profile following training, but the decay rate across groups was similar, suggesting that the slow process was unimpaired across conditions. Collectively, our results provide evidence that noise significantly decreases motor adaptation, but this reduction may be due to its influence over specific learning mechanisms. Importantly, this may have implications for how the motor system compensates for random fluctuations, especially when affected by brain disorders that result in movement tremor (e.g., essential tremor).
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.