ArticleCognitive science2025
Acquisition and Utilization of Recursive Rules in Motor Sequence Generation.
Article in Cognitive science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recursion beyond language: Lexical and arithmetic interference in visual hierarchical embedding.Psychological research · 2026Article
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
Recursive hierarchical embedding allows humans to generate multiple hierarchical levels using simple rules. We can acquire recursion from exposure to linguistic and visual examples, but only develop the ability to understand "multiple-level" structures like "[[second] red] ball]" after mastering "same-level" conjunctions like "[second] and [red] ball." Whether we can also learn recursion in motor production remains unexplored. Here, we tested 40 adults' ability to learn and generate sequences of finger movements using "multiple-level" recursion and "same-level" iteration rules (like linguistic conjunction). Rule order was counterbalanced. First, they learned the generative rules (without explicit rule instructions or feedback) by executing examples of motor sequences based on visual cues displayed on the screen (learning). Second, participants were asked to discriminate between correct and incorrect motor sequences beyond those to which they were previously exposed (discrimination). Finally, they were asked to use the rules to generate new hierarchical levels consistent with the previously given (generation). We repeated the procedure (all three phases) on 2 days, allowing for a night of sleep. We found that most participants could discriminate correct/incorrect sequences based on recursive rules and use recursive rules to generate new hierarchical levels in motor sequences, but mostly on the second day of testing, and when they had acquired iterative before recursive rules. This aligns with previous literature on vision and language and with literature showing that sleep is necessary to generate abstract knowledge of motor sequences. Lastly, we found that the ability to discriminate well-formed motor sequences using recursion was insufficient for motor generativity.
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.