ArticleJournal of vision2026
The role of feedback for sensorimotor decisions under risk.
Article in Journal of vision, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
For goal-directed movements like throwing darts or shooting a soccer penalty, the optimal location to aim depends on the endpoint variability of an individual. Currently, there is no consensus on whether people can optimize their movement planning based on information about their motor variability. Here, we tested the role of different types of feedback for movement planning under risk. We measured saccades toward a bar that consisted of a reward and a penalty region. Participants either received error-based feedback about their endpoint or reinforcement feedback about the resulting reward. We additionally manipulated the feedback schedule to assess the role of feedback frequency and whether feedback focusses on individual trials or a group of trials. Participants with trial-by-trial reinforcement feedback performed best. They were less loss-aversive, had the least endpoint deviation from optimality, and showed more consistent performance at the group level. This combination of reduced between-participant variability and the improved alignment with optimality suggests that reinforcement feedback about a single movement is particularly effective to optimize movement planning under risk.
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.