ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
C.R.A.B.: a gamified paradigm for studying readiness potential.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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.
- The performance of mind: from movement, mental states, and consciousness.Frontiers in psychology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study presents a novel paradigm termed Contrasting Routines Affecting Bereitschaftspotential (C.R.A.B.), designed to analyze readiness potential (RP) waveforms preceding movements across varying experimental settings. This paradigm continues Libet's work on decision-making, with an emphasis on the motor planning component like in classical Libet experiment. However, existing paradigms for studying RP work poorly across ages (requiring different instructions) and do not accurately identify the components associated with RP formation. New method: The C.R.A.B. paradigm enables modeling the when-decision through indirect measurements, thereby avoiding reliance on participants' introspective reports. We believe that this framework can isolate the motor planning component from decision-making and is also suitable for implementation with children of different ages and disorders. Results: As a proof of concept, we employed the C.R.A.B. paradigm with healthy adult participants to validate its effectiveness. Our findings revealed distinct RP waveform variations across different trial conditions. Comparison with existing methods C.R.A.B. paradigm has several advantages over traditional methods: the design of the experiment provides for the assessment of different components of RP-motor planning, attention level, and spontaneity of decision-making since the design of the experiment is developed in a game form, it is suitable for both children and adults. Conclusions: The C.R.A.B. paradigm effectively demonstrated differences in RP waveforms across trial types; therefore, this paradigm can be used to study the various components of the RP in detail. Since this paradigm represents a game interface, it is possible to study the RP in children, including children with various disorders.
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.