ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2026
Space-time interference in action.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 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
Abstract
Space-time interference has been frequently reported in perceptual paradigms, but it is unclear to what extent these effects generalize to action-related tasks. We therefore investigated whether space-time interference extends to the execution of goal-directed reaching movements towards 3D objects presented in immersive virtual reality. Forty participants performed both perceptual and motor judgments with respect to the spatial and temporal occurrence of sequentially from left to right presented 3D spheres, with spatial and temporal interstimulus intervals systematically varied. Consistent with previous findings in 2D paradigms, we observed bidirectional interference in a goal-directed pointing task: larger spatial intervals delayed temporal predictions (positive space-on-time effect), whereas longer temporal intervals shifted spatial predictions leftward (negative time-on-space effect). Perceptual judgments showed a significant positive time-on-space effect, but no space-on-time effect. Interference effects in perceptual and pointing tasks were not correlated. Our findings demonstrate that space-time interference extends to more complex motor behavior, highlighting its relevance for everyday actions such as reaching, catching, and navigating.
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.