Goal-Directed Reaching: The SNARC Effect Influences Movement Planning but not Movement Execution
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
The spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC effect) is a well-documented phenomenon wherein numerical digits spatially bias the selection of a response, with low and high numbers eliciting faster left and right responses, respectively. A host of button press tasks report expression of the SNARC effect for response planning (i.e., reaction time: RT); however, Fischer (2003) reports that the effect can selectively manifest during the movement execution phase (i.e., movement time: MT) of a goal-directed reaching task. Here we employed a kinematic technique to determine whether the reported SNARC effect is expressed in the early or late (or both) stages of a goal-directed reaching trajectory. Results for RT produced a reliable SNARC effect whereas results for MT produced a reversed-SNARC effect that was attributed to the deceleration phase of reach trajectories. More specifically, left space reaches cued by low numbers produced shorter RTs than high number counterparts and were associated with longer MTs (the converse was true of right space reaches). We have interpreted these results in terms of a spatial-numerical bias influencing a trade-off between the temporal properties of movement planning and execution mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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