ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Training effects of affordance judgments in four different settings: towards developing a training battery for affordance judgments.
Article in Experimental brain research, 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.
- Older adults do not consistently overestimate their action opportunities across different settings.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Training affordance judgments (AJs) across different settings, such as judging whether an object is within reach or an obstacle conquerable, could be meaningful to older adults and neurological patients with diminished judgment behaviors.The long-term aim is to develop a comprehensive training battery with different types of AJ tasks. The present study used a between-subjects design to evaluate trainability in four different settings. Judgment behavior of 52 healthy young adults was trained (80 trials) in one out of four settings (per trained task N = 13): 1. Reaching horizontally forward for an object, 2. Fitting one hand horizontally into an aperture, 3. Fitting upright under a horizontal barrier, and 4. Stepping over a hurdle. Participants' judgment performance was assessed pre- versus post-training. Additionally, to assess whether other AJ-based tasks as potential distractors may override training effects, the other three non-trained tasks were presented, and subsequently, judgment performance in the trained task was assessed once more. Accuracy, judgment tendency, and perceptual sensitivity served as dependent variables.A Friedman Test revealed a main effect of time point in all three variables. Post hoc analyses showed significant improvements in the trained task even after exposure to other AJ tasks.The results suggest that in young healthy adults, AJs can be trained effectively within different AJ settings, and improvements within one setting can last, even when AJs in other settings are solved in between. Our study provides proof of principle and an important step towards developing a training battery for AJs.
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.