Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41844636›Full record

ArticleNPJ science of learning2026

Motor sequences resist automatization as attentional demands increase with sequence learning.

Stephan Frederic Dahm, Veit Kraft, Markus Martini, Daniel Krause, Joachim Hermsdoerfer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ science of learning, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Stephan Frederic DahmUniversität Innsbruck, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Sports Sciences, Innsbruck, Austria. stephan.dahm@uibk.ac.at.
Veit KraftTechnical University of Munich, Chair of Human Movement Science, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany.
Markus MartiniUniversität Innsbruck, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Sports Sciences, Innsbruck, Austria.
Daniel KrausePaderborn University, Department of Exercise and Health, Psychology and Human Movement, Paderborn, Germany.
Joachim HermsdoerferTechnical University of Munich, Chair of Human Movement Science, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany.

Funding

Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften APART GSK / 11963
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automatization of motor sequences involves a shift from effortful, attention-dependent control to fluent performance through practice. This study examined how learning cues and instructions influence the development of sequence-specific automatization using a modified serial reaction time task with temporally spaced stimuli. Participants practiced a training sequence across ten sessions under four conditions varying in instruction (intentional vs. incidental) and visual cues (present vs. absent). Performance was assessed before and after training under single- and dual-task conditions for trained and control sequences. Results demonstrated robust sequence learning, with faster reaction times for trained than control sequences. Intentional instruction enhanced learning, particularly with visual cues. Contrary to expectations, dual-task costs decreased for the control sequence but increased for the trained sequence. Sequence-specific dual-task costs were associated with superior learning and explicit knowledge, suggesting that deeper sequence encoding may prolong attentional demands despite extensive practice.

Identifiers

PMID41844636
PMCPMC13144694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.