MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415961979 · doi:10.1037/bne0000638

Error-related processes during motor imagery are a driver of motor learning.

2025· article· en· W4415961979 on OpenAlexaff
Theresa C. L. S. Gaughan, Austin Hurst, Heather F. Neyedli, Shaun G. Boe

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotor imageryCovertMotor learningMotor controlCognitionMotor skillTask (project management)Sensory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

² = 0.43) of physical performance, with participants who showed the greatest improvement in self-reported accuracy also demonstrating greater accuracy during physical performance. These findings support the notion that error-related processes are present and likely play a critical role in learning via motor imagery. We discuss possible mechanisms of error processing in motor imagery, including the updating of internal models. We conclude by proposing a "fusion model" of motor imagery, which posits that motor imagery integrates sensory predictions of movement with a cognitive simulation of movement that permits updating of sensory prediction, in turn facilitating performance improvement and ultimately motor learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral NeuroscienceSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207