ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2026
Movement enhances tactile sensitivity through prediction.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2026. 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.
- Effects of prediction and attention on tactile precision in somatosensory gating.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tactile sensations decrease in felt intensity during movement, a phenomenon known as sensory gating. Competing theories attempt to explain why somatosensory perception is down-weighted during motion. We investigated how motor execution and prediction shape tactile sensations by precisely matching kinematics between active and passive movements. Perceived intensity was reduced in both conditions, but tactile sensitivity was enhanced rather than impaired during active movement compared with passive movement at matched kinematics. When passive movement velocity was predictable, sensitivity increased to the level of active movement, whereas temporal unpredictability impaired precision without affecting bias. These results show that predictions about imminent kinematics intrinsic to self-generated actions or learned during predictable passive motion sharpen tactile discrimination, whereas a separate movement-related process reduces perceived intensity. Our results reveal that movement does not globally suppress tactile processing but differentially affects bias and precision: perceived intensity decreases, whereas tactile discrimination improves when upcoming kinematics are predictable.
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.