Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41070189›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2025

Negative expectations and measurable movement mechanics: a scoping review of the nocebo effect on motor performance.

Jennifer Burgos-Tirado, Guillaume Léonard, Adrien Hakimi, Deborah Vancraeynest, Thierry Lelard, Maryne Cozette

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jennifer Burgos-TiradoUR-UPJV EA 3300, APERE - Adaptations Physiologiques á l'Exercice et Réadaptation á l'effort - UFR des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
Guillaume LéonardResearch Centre on Aging, CIUSSS de l'Estrie - CHUS, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Adrien HakimiUR-UPJV EA 3300, APERE - Adaptations Physiologiques á l'Exercice et Réadaptation á l'effort - UFR des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
Deborah VancraeynestUR-UPJV EA 3300, APERE - Adaptations Physiologiques á l'Exercice et Réadaptation á l'effort - UFR des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
Thierry LelardUR-UPJV EA 3300, APERE - Adaptations Physiologiques á l'Exercice et Réadaptation á l'effort - UFR des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
Maryne CozetteUR-UPJV EA 3300, APERE - Adaptations Physiologiques á l'Exercice et Réadaptation á l'effort - UFR des Sciences du Sport, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The nocebo effect, where negative responses can occur as a result of negative expectations, has gained increasing attention in motor control research, with growing evidence highlighting its impact on both athletic and everyday movements. However, the specific methodologies used to induce nocebo effects on motor outcomes remain unexplored. This scoping review aimed to address three key questions: (1) What experimental protocols have been developed and used to elicit nocebo effects in motor performance in healthy individuals? (2) How are these effects assessed and measured? (3) What are the observed effects on motor outcomes? Methods: A scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA framework, searching PubMed, EBSCO, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from inception to March 2025. Eighteen studies were included. Results and discussion: Verbal instruction was the most common induction method (94.4 %), often combined with conditioning or visual cues. Motor tasks assessed gross skills, such as sprinting and cycling), with limited attention given to fine motor control. Outcomes were more frequently centered on performance measures (e.g., strength, endurance), with less emphasis on movement quality (e.g., coordination). Nocebo effects were observed in half of the studies impairing motor performance, including reduced force production, diminished endurance, disrupted postural stability and slower movement speed. The findings highlight methodological diversity in induction protocols and measurement methods. Future research should expand participant diversity, investigate fine motor tasks, and further explore the interplay between induction methods and motor outcomes.

Indexed as

avoidance learningkinematicsmotor controlnocebo effectpain perceptionpsychological conditioningpsychomotor performance

Identifiers

PMID41070189
PMCPMC12504500

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.