ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
Studying human habit formation through motor sequence learning.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Habits are automatic behaviors triggered by specific cues and are thought to optimize daily activities by reducing cognitive effort and enabling efficient and fast performance. Yet, they can also lead to inflexibility, preventing individuals from adapting to environmental changes. Since it has been difficult to examine habit formation in humans with traditional outcome devaluation paradigms, we applied a motor sequence learning task (MSLT) to study this process. Thirty-one participants (16 female, 28.4 ± 5.3 years old) completed the MSLT on two consecutive days. They implicitly learned to execute a 12-item motor sequence using four fingers, each corresponding to one of four distinct visual stimulus locations. Test blocks introduced sequence deviations by intermittently omitting one item of the sequence. We measured whether participants were able to flexibly adapt their behavior or would incorrectly execute the omitted response - a so-called action slip. Action slips serve as an indicator of automatization or behavioral inflexibility. Findings indicate that prolonged training led to faster response times and lower error rates in learning compared to random blocks, suggesting successful sequence learning and the emergence of automatic behaviors. Action slips increased with extensive training, demonstrating the shift towards automatic and inflexible responding, indicative of habit formation. The results highlight the utility of the MSLT in studying habit formation in humans and emphasize the role of extensive training, motor skills, and automaticity. The task offers a promising framework for investigating the neural and cognitive mechanisms underlying habitual behavior, providing new insights into the balance between habitual and goal-directed control.
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.