ArticleNPJ science of learning2025
Target configuration determines how and what we learn during sensorimotor adaptation.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 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.
- Hypothesis testing governs strategic motor learning.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Serial dependence in goal-directed interceptive hand movements.BMC biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motor adaptation is essential for keeping our actions well-calibrated. However, the role of training context-specifically, the configuration of targets-in shaping motor adaptation remains poorly understood. We tested this by exposing participants to a visuomotor gain perturbation under two contexts: The Extent Group, which trained with targets at two amplitudes in a fixed angular direction, and the Angular Group, which trained with targets at equal amplitude in two angular directions. Strikingly, the groups differed in how they learned: the Angular Group relied predominantly on implicit adaptation, whereas the Extent Group relied more on explicit strategies. Additionally, the two groups differed in what they learned: the Angular Group acquired a translation rule, whereas the Extent Group captured the true gain rule. These findings underscore that training context determines both the processes engaged and the representations formed, underscoring its importance in shaping both how and what we learn.
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.