ArticlePsychological research2026
Binding continuous response features of extended movements: Integration with discrete response but not stimulus features.
Article in Psychological research, 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.
- Moving beyond discrete categories in motor cognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Binding and retrieval have been portrayed as key mechanisms in human action control. This theoretical framework posits that features of perception and action (e.g., object color, effector, etc.) are bound to each other. Afterwards, re-encountering one feature can retrieve bound features, thereby facilitating action repetition. Previous research focused on bindings with discrete response features (e.g., responding with a left or right button). This focus neglects the rich information required to control body movements. Here, we investigated continuous response features of extended movements related to both action goals and the implementation of these goals. Participants swiped their fingers on a tablet toward a small, briefly presented target circle that was accompanied by a sound. We analyzed response errors and similarity between successive response positions, depending on the sequence of (1) swiped hands, (2) irrelevant sounds, and (3) target positions. Sound repetitions did not bias responses toward preceding target or response positions whereas hand repetitions biased responding toward both positions, especially when target positions repeated. On the one hand, stimulus-response binding and retrieval seem to be remarkably focused on discrete response features, thus challenging the role of this mechanism in controlling overt body movements. On the other hand, fine-grained features of a response can be bound and retrieved from other response features, providing short-cuts to both the agents' previous action goals and the implemented deviation from these goals.Public significance statementHumans do not explicitly think about every action. Instead, they automatically connect what they perceive with how they act, a process that facilitates repetition of actions. Yet, which aspects of perception and action can become connected remains a topic of debate. Our study shows that these connections may extend beyond categorical action features (e.g., pressing a certain button on a phone) to metric action features (e.g., touching a specific position on a screen).
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.