Startle induces early initiation of classically conditioned postural responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Startling acoustic stimuli (SAS) induce the early release of prepared motor responses. The current study used SAS, in conjunction with a classical conditioning paradigm, to examine advanced motor preparation of conditioned postural responses (PRs). After generalized startle responses were induced, standing posture was perturbed in 2 blocks of 15 Conditioning trials, where in each trial the onset of a nonstartling auditory cue [i.e., a conditioned stimulus (CS)] preceded a leftward support-surface translation. Upon completion of each block, a single trial was conducted. After block 1, a CS-Only trial was used to induce conditioned PRs in the absence of balance perturbations. After block 2, a post-Conditioning Startle trial that involved a CS subsequently followed by a SAS was used to examine motor preparation of conditioned PRs. PRs were quantified in terms of center of pressure displacements, ankle and hip kinematics, as well as surface electromyography of proximal and distal bilateral muscle pairs. Results indicated that repeated experience with cued balance perturbations led to PR conditioning and, more importantly, motor preparation of PRs. Conditioning was evidenced in biomechanical and electromyographic responses observed in CS-Only trials, as well as the progressive changes to evoked response parameters during repeated Conditioning trials. SAS presented in post-Conditioning Startle trials evoked early onsets of biomechanical and electromyographic responses, while preserving relative response parameters that were each distinct from generalized startle responses. These results provide important insight into both the consequences of using cues in dynamic postural control studies and the neural mechanisms governing PRs.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".