Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40800533›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024

Initial learning in the brain: From rules to action.

Sofia Fregni, Uta Wolfensteller, Hannes Ruge

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sofia FregniFakultät Psychologie, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Uta WolfenstellerFakultät Psychologie, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Hannes RugeFakultät Psychologie, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used fMRI to investigate the neural changes and representational dynamics associated with different learning modes during initial learning and subsequent implementation of previously acquired stimulus-response (S-R) associations. We compared instruction-based learning (INS) and trial-and-error learning (TE) via a third observation-based learning (OBS) condition. This was yoked to the TE condition and shared features with both, the INS and TE conditions. During learning, neural changes were observed in the Frontoparietal and Default Mode Networks across learning modes, consistent with a general decrease in cognitive control demand as learning progresses. INS and TE exhibited condition-specific signal changes, which we interpreted in the context of covert motor preparation during INS, and intentional action and increased cognitive control demand during early TE trials, respectively. Multivariate pattern analysis revealed individual rule information in bilateral prefrontal, premotor, and parietal cortices across learning modes. Most regions revealed consistent representations of individual S-R rules between the learning stage and subsequent implementation stage, regardless of the learning mode. This suggests that initially formed S-R rule representations guide task performance during S-R rule implementation, irrespective of how they are acquired. Finally, within the primary motor and sensory cortices, individual S-R rules were decodable during the learning stage not only when motor responses were overtly executed, as in TE, but also in the absence of overt motor execution, as in INS. This finding substantiates previous claims of covert motor preparatory mechanisms during INS.

Indexed as

instruction-based learningMVPAtrial-and-error learning

Identifiers

PMID40800533
PMCPMC12327077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.