ArticleExperimental brain research2025
"Automatic" online reach corrections are associated with individual differences in executive function.
Article in Experimental brain research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that the dorsal visual stream is able to execute rapid online movement corrections to sudden changes in target position. This "automatic pilot" can operate in the absence of visual awareness, and even under circumstances where participants are instructed to not correct their movements. In the current study, we examined the extent to which these "automatic" corrections might be related to individual differences in executive function. To examine this, healthy adult participants (n = 80) completed two versions of the automatic pilot task on a touch screen: (1) a "Correct" condition in which participants were instructed to correct their movement to the new target location on jump trials, and (2) an "Ignore" condition in which participants were told to ignore any target jumps, and point to the initial target location. In addition to completing these two versions of the automatic pilot task, participants also completed the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART), in which they were asked to respond when a number was presented, except for the number 3. Finally, participants completed self-report questionnaires indexing executive attention, impulsivity, and executive function including the Adult ADHD Self Report Scale (ASRS), the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), and the Behavioural Rating Inventory of Executive Function for Adults (BRIEF-A).Our results indicated that, similar to previous research, participants made significantly more corrections to target jumps in the "Correct" condition, compared to the "Ignore" condition. Importantly, "automatic" unintended corrections in the "Ignore" condition were significantly correlated with poorer scores on the ASRS, the CFQ and the BRIEF-A. However, unintended corrections were not correlated with errors or reaction times on the SART. These results suggest that the automatic pilot task is sensitive to self-reported individual differences in executive function, and may be useful as a visuomotor measure of response inhibition and cognitive control in both healthy and clinical populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40601010What 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.