Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40070908›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Which factors influence plan reuse in a sequential posture selection task?

Christoph Schütz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christoph SchützFaculty of Psychology and Sports Science, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a sequential posture selection task, we reuse former motor plans to reduce cognitive planning cost. The resulting persistence in the former posture, termed motor hysteresis, can serve as a proxy for the percentage of motor plan reuse (PoR). A recent study showed a significant drop in PoR if participants were asked to skip every second drawer in a sequential drawer opening task. In the current study, we sought to disentangle four confounded factors that were potentially responsible for this drop in PoR: a change of (1) spatial distance, (2) digit distance, (3) number of drawers, or (4) context (presence of skipped drawers). To this end, two groups of participants were tested in a series of sequential drawer tasks, where each of the four potential influencing factors was varied independently. PoR was calculated as the dependent variable. Participants displayed a hysteresis effect in all ordered tasks, but the PoR was only reduced by an increase in spatial distance. The three remaining factors had no significant effect. This finding indicates that motor planning is only affected by local (spatial) parameters of the task, but not by context factors (digits, skipped drawers) or global parameters such as the number of drawers.

Indexed as

hysteresisinfluencing factorsmotor plan reuseposture selectionsequential effects

Identifiers

PMID40070908
PMCPMC11894580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.