ArticleExperimental brain research2026
Effects of augmented feedback delay on neural correlates of feedback processing in motor practice.
Article in Experimental brain research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distinct neural correlates are associated with the processing of augmented feedback during motor learning. To examine the basic neural response of delayed augmented feedback, 33 participants practiced a right-arm flexion-extension-movement performed with an arm-lever-device in 192 trials with subsequent feedback presentation. The movement sequence consisted of three movement reversals, which were practiced with the goal of minimizing errors in spatial accuracy. Based on a performance-adaptive bandwidth for spatial movement accuracy, participants received delayed augmented feedback indicating whether they had achieved one predefined reversal (of the three), or not. The feedback delay duration alternated block-wise between 1500 ms and 7000 ms. EEG was recorded throughout practice. The error-related negativity (ERN) and the error positivity (Pe) are assumed to reflect neural error processing in a predictive manner based on intrinsic information, whereas the feedback-related negativity (FRN) is assumed to reflect neural error processing in a postdictive manner based on extrinsic outcome feedback. It was hypothesized that the ERN and the Pe would be more pronounced in trials with longer feedback delays, which unfortunately could not be tested. The relevant components were not detected in the signal, possibly due to the complex sequential structure of the task and the feedback pattern. With respect to feedback valence, results regarding the FRN were as expected. Further, the results demonstrate a more pronounced neural processing of augmented feedback with respect to a shorter feedback delay duration. These results indicate that delaying augmented feedback impacts the neural processing of augmented feedback in motor practice.
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.