The Visuomotor Mental Rotation Task: Visuomotor Transformation Times Are Reduced for Small and Perceptually Familiar Angles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the visuomotor mental rotation (VMR) task, participants point to a location that deviates from a visual cue by a predetermined angle. This task elicits longer reaction times (RT) relative to tasks wherein the visual cue is spatially compatible with the movement goal. The authors previously reported that visuomotor transformations are faster and more efficient when VMR responses elicit a degree of dimensional overlap (i.e., 0° and 5°) or when the transformation involves a perceptually familiar angle (i.e., 90° or 180°; K. A. Neely & M. Heath, 2010b). One caveat to this finding is that standard and VMR responses were completed in separate blocks of trials. Thus, between-task differences not only reflect the temporal demands of the visuomotor transformations, but also reflect the temporal cost of response inhibition. The goal of this study was to isolate the time cost of visuomotor transformations in the VMR task. The results demonstrated that visuomotor transformations are more efficient and effective when the response entails a degree of dimensional overlap between target and response (i.e., when the angular disparity between the responses is small) or when the transformation angle is perceptually familiar.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it