Adapting to Altered Sensory Input: Effects of Induced Paresthesia on Goal-Directed Movement Planning and Execution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigated how temporarily induced paresthesia in the moving limb affects the performance of a goal-directed target aiming task. Three-dimensional displacement data of 14 neurotypical participants were recorded while they pointed to a target on a computer monitor in four conditions: (i) paresthesia-full-vision; (ii) paresthesia-without-target vision; (iii) no-paresthesia-full-vision; (iv) no paresthesia-without-target vision. The four conditions were blocked and counterbalanced such that participants performed the paresthesia and no-paresthesia conditions on two separate days. To assess how aiming performance changed in the presence of paresthesia, we compared early versus late performance (first and last 20% of trials). We found that endpoint accuracy and movement speed were reduced in the presence of paresthesia, but only without target vision. With repetition, participants adjusted their movement performance strategy, such that with induced paresthesia, they used a movement strategy that included more pre-planned movements that depended less on online control.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".