Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42909120›Full record

ArticleiScience2026

No practice and still perfect: Different routes for promoting offline gains in perceptual learning.

Ylka Kolken, Mark J Roberts, Parisa Naseri, Federico De Martino, Nitzan Censor, Peter De Weerd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 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

6 authors.

Ylka KolkenDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Oxfordlaan 55, 6229EV Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Mark J RobertsDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Oxfordlaan 55, 6229EV Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Parisa NaseriDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Oxfordlaan 55, 6229EV Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Federico De MartinoDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Oxfordlaan 55, 6229EV Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Nitzan CensorSchool of Psychological Sciences and Sagol School of Neuroscience, Tel Aviv Univeristy, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.
Peter De WeerdDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Oxfordlaan 55, 6229EV Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual perceptual learning is thought to require extensive training, but a few reminder trials can sometimes replace daily practice. In a 5-day texture discrimination learning experiment, we showed that both accounts need amendment. Following an initial training session, we found that further skill acquisition can be accomplished either with repeated daily administration of a few reminder trials or by offline learning without any further training, depending on attentional context and task demands. In dual-task conditions involving the simultaneous discrimination of a peripheral texture target and a central fixation target, reminders were as effective as daily training, whereas no learning occurred without reminders. In contrast, in a single-task condition without a fixation task, learning emerged without reminders or training. Hence, attentional context and task demands may determine the ability of reminders or protracted consolidation to yield offline learning gains that are comparable to those delivered by daily training.

Indexed as

attentionconsolidationperceptual learningtexture discrimination task

Identifiers

PMID42909120
PMCPMC13683855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.