ArticleScientific reports2025
Tuning of task-relevant stiffness in multiple directions.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Stabilizing stiffness is the most limiting factor in human force exertion.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A control engineering perspective on the advantages of efference copies.Biological cybernetics · 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
In contrast to robots, humans can rapidly and elegantly modulate the impedance of their arms and hands during initial contact with objects. Anticipating collisions by setting mechanical impedance to counter near-instantaneous changes in force and displacement is one reason we excel at manipulating objects. We investigated the ability to set impedance in an object interaction task with rapid changes in force and displacement, like those encountered during manipulation in different directions. Subjects (n = 20) predictively co-activated antagonist muscles to adjust one component of the impedance - stiffness - to match the task demands before the movement began, irrespective of movement direction. Subjects adopted the minimal stiffness needed to complete the task, but when pushed to the most difficult condition, they were limited by their ability to produce high stiffness rather than large force. This robust and simple strategy ensured task success at the expense of energy efficiency. Our results confirm the ability of humans to predictively set and control mechanical impedance in task-relevant directions in anticipation of breaking contact. This offers the prospect that future investigations will find neural correlates of impedance, which in turn, could improve the ability of neuro-prosthetic limbs to interact with objects.
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.