Cited by 313Motor Control and AdaptationMemory and Neural MechanismsSport Psychology and Performance

Reward Improves Long-Term Retention of a Motor Memory through Induction of Offline Memory Gains

Open access
Abe, Mitsunari, Schambra, Heidi, Wassermann, Eric M., Luckenbaugh, Dave, Schweighofer, Nicolas, Cohen, Leonardo G.·2011·Current Biology

Abstract

In humans, training in which good performance is rewarded or bad performance punished results in transient behavioral improvements. The relative effects of reward and punishment on consolidation and long-term retention, critical behavioral stages for successful learning, are not known. Here, we investigated the effects of reward and punishment on these different stages of human motor skill learning. We studied healthy subjects who trained on a motor task under rewarded, punished, or neutral control conditions. Performance was tested before and immediately, 6 hr, 24 hr, and 30 days after training in the absence of reward or punishment. Performance improvements immediately after training were comparable in the three groups. At 6 hr, the rewarded group maintained performance gains, whereas the other two groups experienced significant forgetting. At 24 hr, the reward group showed significant offline (posttraining) improvements, whereas the other two groups did not. At 30 days, the rewarded group retained the gains identified at 24 hr, whereas the other two groups experienced significant forgetting. We conclude that training under rewarded conditions is more effective than training under punished or neutral conditions in eliciting lasting motor learning, an advantage driven by offline memory gains that persist over time.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2011.02.030

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • All groups performed similarly immediately after practice, but 6 hours later the rewarded group outperformed the other two and showed gains after 24 hours and 30 days.

    “Interestingly, all groups demonstrated similar performances immediately after the practice phase.However, 6 hours later, the rewarded group outperformed the other two groups and, in contrast to the punished and control groups, even showed performance gains after 24 hours and 30 days.”
  • A group receiving monetary rewards for good performance on a tracking task during practice showed more effective learning than a group punished for poor performance or a control group.

    “Abe and colleagues (Abe et al., 2011) found that a group receiving monetary rewards for good performance on a tracking task during practice showed more effective learning than a group that was punished for poor performance (by having money deducted) or a control group.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abe, M., Schambra, H., Wassermann, E. M., Luckenbaugh, D., Schweighofer, N., & Cohen, L. G.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Cohen, Leonardo G.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-04
Volume
21
Issue
7
Pages
557-562
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2142533684
Cited by
313
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
6.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (ZIANS002978)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
Keywords
reward, punishment, motor skill learning, long-term retention, memory consolidation, forgetting
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Motor Activity, Motor Skills, Punishment, Retention, Psychology, Reward, Young Adult, Memory, Long-Term

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review