ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2025
Divisive attenuation based on noisy sensorimotor predictions accounts for excess variability in self-touch.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vision Fine-Tunes Predictions of Bimanual Self-Touch.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Suppressing Sensation during Action across Species and Sensory Modalities: Predictive and Nonpredictive Mechanisms of Sensory Modulation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Attenuation of Self-Induced Pain in Women With Nonsuicidal Self-Injury and Healthy Controls.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Article
- The extraordinary enigma of ordinary tickle behavior: Why gargalesis still puzzles neuroscience.Science advances · 2025Review
- Predictions of bimanual self-touch determine the temporal tuning of somatosensory perception.iScience · 2025Article
- A neurocognitive pathway for engineering artificial touch.Science advances · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When one part of the body exerts force on another part, the resulting tactile sensation is perceived as weaker than when the same force is applied by an external agent. This phenomenon has been studied using a force matching task, in which observers were first exposed to an external force on a passive finger and then instructed to reproduce the sensation by directly pressing on the passive finger with a finger of the other hand: healthy participants consistently exceeded the original force level. However, this exaggeration of the target force was not observed if the observer generated the matching force indirectly, by adjusting a joystick or slider that controlled the force output of a motor. Here, we present the first detailed computational account of the processes leading to the exaggeration of target forces in the force-matching task, incorporating attenuation of sensory signals based on motor predictions. The model elucidates previously unappreciated contributions of multiple sources of noise, including memory noise, in determining matching force output, and it shows that quantifying attenuation as the discrepancy between direct and indirect self-generated forces isolates its predictive component. Our computational account makes the prediction that attenuated sensations will display greater trial-to-trial variability than unattenuated ones because they incorporate additional noise from motor prediction. Quantitative model fitting of new and existing force-matching data confirmed the prediction of excess variability in self-generated forces and provided evidence for a divisive rather than subtractive mechanism of attenuation, while highlighting its predictive nature.
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.