ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Cognitive and motor abilities predict auditory-cued finger tapping in a dual task.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of a secondary mental task and additional auditory feedback on body movements and EEG.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Dual-Task Interference Increases Variability in Sub-Second Repetitive Motor Timing.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Cognitive and motor abilities predict auditory-cued finger tapping in a dual task.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rhythmic auditory stimulation, a therapeutic method involving repetitive movements cued by rhythmic sounds, can support movement (re-)learning and attentional orienting, but effects vary. While properties of cues have been extensively studied, not much is known about the impact of individual differences in cognitive and motor abilities that enable sensorimotor synchronization. This study examined how stimulus complexity (metronome/music) and cognitive and motor functions affect tapping timing consistency and force. Fifty healthy young adults (ages 18-39) performed several finger tapping tasks, specifically, as a stand-alone task (single task), and simultaneously with 2-Back working memory task (dual task), each to sounds with a clear, steady beat and differing levels of rhythmic complexity (metronome vs. music). Standardized neuropsychological tests were related to consistency and force in the single task and to their dual task cost (interference). The dual task led to lower tapping consistency for both auditory cues. Poorer cognitive inhibition and better gross motor ability each predicted greater applied force. In contrast, participants with poorer fine motor ability tapped with lower force. Accounting for musical training and reward from music revealed that sustained attention, verbal memory, musical training and reward additionally predicted tapping force, whereas only musical training predicted better tapping consistency. These non-linear relationships were shown for both single and dual tasks, but not for the dual task cost. Overall, this study highlights the complex interactions of movement functions and cognitive abilities with sensorimotor synchronization, essential to many music-based interventions, and underlines the importance of the consideration of individual baseline abilities.
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.