ArticlePloS one2025
A mixed methods exploration of motor imagery in autistic and non-autistic adults: Diverse experiences and implications for interventions.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A GRASS-guided phased progressive brain-computer interface approach for post-infarction hand motor recovery.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Speed-accuracy trade-offs in action perception, motor imagery, and execution of hand movements in autistic and non-autistic adults.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research on motor imagery (MI) in non-autistic individuals suggests that there are shared neural circuitries between imagery and execution. The relationship between imagined and executed movements, and the use of MI in autistic adults is poorly understood. This study explored MI comprehension, prior use of MI, and subjective experiences during MI in autistic and non-autistic adults. Twenty autistic and twenty non-autistic individuals responded to a series of questions probing their understanding of and engagement in MI. Participants then completed the Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ), and reported on their subjective experiences during MI. Although there were no differences between the autistic and non-autistic individuals in their understanding of MI, the non-autistic group may have more prior use of MI in their everyday lives. Additionally, autistic participants generally reported less vivid imagery on the KVIQ compared to non-autistic participants, however experiences during MI varied widely across both groups ranging from vivid/intense images/sensations to the inability to imagine. In summary, some autistic individuals are able to engage in MI, but, similar to their non-autistic peers, MI ability and experiences vary across individuals. This work has important implications for MI interventions aimed at improving motor coordination.
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.