The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reward Improves Long-Term Retention of a Motor Memory through Induction of Offline Memory Gains
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“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.”
From Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (2016) · cites this paper as Abe et al., 2011
In the citing paper
“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.”
From Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (2016) · cites this paper as Abe et al., 2011
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957) · doi:10.1037/10627-000 · Cited by 4,894
Getting formal with dopamine and reward
Schultz, W. (2002) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00967-4 · Cited by 2,574
Reward representations and reward-related learning in the human brain: Insights from neuroimaging
O’Doherty, J. P. (2004) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2004.10.016 · Cited by 1,426
Reis, J., Schambra, H. M., Cohen, L. G., Buch, E. R., Fritsch, B., Zarahn, E., Celnik, P. A., & Krakauer, J. W. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0805413106 · Cited by 1,401
Self-citationTwo types of dopamine neuron distinctly convey positive and negative motivational signals
Matsumoto, M., & Hikosaka, O. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08028 · Cited by 1,378
Reorganization and plasticity in the adult brain during learning of motor skills
Doyon, J., & Benali, H. (2005) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2005.03.004 · Cited by 1,028
Distinct contribution of the cortico-striatal and cortico-cerebellar systems to motor skill learning
Doyon, J., Penhune, V. B., & Ungerleider, L. G. (2002) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/s0028-3932(02)00158-6 · Cited by 885
A cellular mechanism of reward-related learning
Reynolds, J. N. J., Hyland, B. I., & Wickens, J. R. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35092560 · Cited by 879
Dopamine-mediated regulation of corticostriatal synaptic plasticity
Calabresi, P., Picconi, B., Tozzi, A., & Di Filippo, M. (2007) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2007.03.001 · Cited by 865
Prediction of immediate and future rewards differentially recruits cortico-basal ganglia loops
Tanaka, S. C., Doya, K., Okada, G., Ueda, K., Okamoto, Y., & Yamawaki, S. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1279 · Cited by 779
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neuroplasticity Subserving Motor Skill Learning
Dayan, E., & Cohen, L. G. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.10.008 · Cited by 1,408
Self-citationPrinciples of sensorimotor learning
Wolpert, D. M., Diedrichsen, J., & Flanagan, J. R. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3112 · Cited by 1,391
Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0999-9 · Cited by 1,238
Brain–machine interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: A controlled study
Ramos‐Murguialday, A., Broetz, D., Rea, M., Läer, L., Yilmaz, Ö., Brasil, F. L., Liberati, G., Curado, M. R., García‐Cossio, E., Vyziotis, A., et al. (2013) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.23879 · Cited by 994
Self-citationDistinct roles for direct and indirect pathway striatal neurons in reinforcement
Kravitz, A. V., Tye, L. D., & Kreitzer, A. C. (2012) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.3100 · Cited by 972
Metadata
- 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)
- PMC
- PMC3075334
- 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
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- 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
