The DOI matches its Crossref record; 339 of the 339 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 60 of the 320 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review
Open accessAbstract
It is generally accepted that augmented feedback, provided by a human expert or a technical display, effectively enhances motor learning. However, discussion of the way to most effectively provide augmented feedback has been controversial. Related studies have focused primarily on simple or artificial tasks enhanced by visual feedback. Recently, technical advances have made it possible also to investigate more complex, realistic motor tasks and to implement not only visual, but also auditory, haptic, or multimodal augmented feedback. The aim of this review is to address the potential of augmented unimodal and multimodal feedback in the framework of motor learning theories. The review addresses the reasons for the different impacts of feedback strategies within or between the visual, auditory, and haptic modalities and the challenges that need to be overcome to provide appropriate feedback in these modalities, either in isolation or in combination. Accordingly, the design criteria for successful visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback are elaborated.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review synthesizes evidence on augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback for motor learning, emphasizing that effectiveness depends on task complexity, learning phase, and feedback design. It concludes that concurrent feedback can aid complex tasks early but may create dependency, and that systematic comparisons across modalities and designs are still lacking.
Key findings
- For simple tasks, concurrent visual feedback often improves acquisition but harms retention, consistent with the guidance and specificity-of-learning hypotheses; for complex tasks, concurrent visual feedback more often helps, especially in early learning, and may reduce cognitive load.
- Haptic position control is generally not advantageous; one cited study found that preventing errors prolonged learning by about 15 times. Error augmentation/amplification can outperform guidance, and one walking study reported 26% faster adaptation to a transiently amplified force field.
- Auditory feedback through alarms, sonification, and error sonification can support learning; a shooting study using error sonification in 50% of 440 shots across 11 sessions over 4 weeks found retention benefits at 2, 10, and 40 days. Multimodal feedback is promising, but concurrent audio-haptic or audio-visuo-haptic feedback for motor learning had not been investigated.
- Design matters: abstract visualizations suit tasks with few relevant variables; natural or virtual-teacher displays may help but can overwhelm; feedback frequency should fade or be self-controlled; feedback should target key features and avoid task-irrelevant errors.
Methods
- Narrative review of motor learning literature on augmented feedback, covering visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal modalities, with definitions and theoretical framing.
- Mainly reviews studies with healthy participants; patient studies are included only partly for broader design discussion.
- Organizes evidence by modality and task complexity, discusses design criteria, and proposes future directions; no primary experiment or meta-analysis is reported.
Limitations
- The paper states that general conclusions cannot be drawn because movement tasks are diverse and lack systematic evaluation within classes; comparisons between concurrent and other feedback strategies are often missing; feedback designs within a modality are rarely evaluated before cross-modal comparisons; and multimodal feedback research is still early.
- The review is limited to mainly healthy subjects; patient rehabilitation effects are beyond its scope and only partly considered.
- Evident from the text: many studies did not assess retention or learning, especially auditory alarms, vibrotactile sports feedback, and some simulator or haptic studies; haptic feedback has rarely been compared against other modalities; and auditory display design and interpretability are not systematically evaluated.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
127 No full text of the sources · 74 Own interpretation · 36 No basis given · 24 Sources not found · 24 Not checked yet · 19 Supported · 19 Supported so far · 17 Partly supported · 3 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Own result · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“No-feedback trials are needed to develop a persistent internal movement representation, which can be recalled in retention tests when augmented feedback is withdrawn (Crowell & Davis, 2011;Kovacs & Shea, 2011;Winstein, 1991).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Crowell & Davis, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says gradually removing feedback helps runners rely on internal cues and may improve persistence of a motor pattern. The Discussion reports that reduced loading persisted at one month and proposes faded feedback as the reason. The paper does not establish that no-feedback trials are necessary or demonstrate the development and recall of an internal movement representation. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kovacs & Shea, 2011 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Winstein, 1991 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“At least for perceiving spatial information, vision dominates other senses (Nesbitt, 2003).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback: Impact of task complexity and design criteria
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Nesbitt, 2003
The section titled “SV-2.1 For spatial location, vision dominates other senses” states the claim directly. Sections SV-2.1.1 and SH-5.4 further describe vision dominating auditory and haptic perception of spatial position. No page numbers are provided in the supplied passages. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Another reason might be that in an early learning phase, concurrent feedback can prevent cognitive overload and, therefore, enhance learning of complex motor tasks (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 source
The Summary (page unavailable) reports that concurrent feedback on every practice trial was most effective for learning a complex ski-simulator task and links frequent feedback to the task’s high attentional and memory demands. The Cognitive Effort and Information-Processing Demands section explains that additional demands can compete for limited processing capacity early in complex-skill learning. Together, these support the citing sentence’s hedged explanation. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Fading feedback-that is, reduced feedback frequency over time-has been shown to be effective (Crowell & Davis, 2011;Kovacs & Shea, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Crowell & Davis, 2011 source
The Methods (section 2.4) describe feedback being progressively removed over the last four sessions. The Discussion (section 4) reports that the retraining program reduced loading and that the changes persisted for at least one month; the authors suggest the faded-feedback design contributed to that retention. The study supports effectiveness of a program using faded feedback, though it does not isolate fading as the cause. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kovacs & Shea, 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Thus, the frequency of feedback should decrease with increasing skill level-that is, with decreasing functional task complexityto further facilitate motor learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004;Timmermans, Seelen, Willmann, & Kingma, 2009;Wulf & Shea, 2002;Wulf, Shea, & Matschiner, 1998).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
- Partly supportedcites Timmermans, Seelen, Willmann, & Kingma, 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section, under “Nature and timing of feedback addresses different stages of motor learning” (page unavailable), recommends tailoring feedback to skill level and says progressively reducing its frequency might improve retention and transfer. It relates task complexity to the performer’s skill, but does not state that functional task complexity necessarily decreases as skill increases; it also presents the learning benefit as tentative. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Partly supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper says functional task complexity decreases as expertise develops, and its Feedback frequency section reports that reduced feedback can benefit simpler tasks. But its section on complex skills late in practice treats reducing feedback with increasing experience as a possibility requiring further study, not an established recommendation that it should be reduced to facilitate learning. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Applied methods and gained results of related studies have revealed that the impact of augmented feedback depends on task complexity and skill level (Timmermans et al., 2009;Utley & Astill, 2008;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback: Impact of task complexity and design criteria
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Timmermans et al., 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Results, under “Nature and timing of feedback addresses different stages of motor learning,” the paper says feedback should be tailored to the recipient’s skill level. It also says the optimal amount of feedback depends on task complexity relative to the performer’s skill level, supporting the citing sentence’s broad paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not matchedcites Utley & Astill, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Feedback frequency section reports that the effectiveness of augmented feedback varies with task complexity and that task-related experience interacts with the optimal feedback schedule. It also notes that frequent feedback may benefit complex-skill learning until learners gain more experience. Page numbers were not provided in the supplied passages. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“However, one should be careful in transferring conclusions found in studies on simple tasks to complex task learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004;Winstein, 1991;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Winstein, 1991 source
- Supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 source
In “A Case Against the Utilization of Primarily Simple Tasks in the Study of Motor Skills,” the authors say that principles derived from simple skills are not always generalizable to complex skills and that generalizing from simple laboratory tasks to complex-skill training is problematic. This directly supports the caution in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.95)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Accelerationtime plots taught runners how to reduce excessive impact forces (Crowell & Davis, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Crowell & Davis, 2011 source
The Methods section (2.4, Gait Retraining) says runners watched a displayed tibial-acceleration signal and were instructed to keep its peaks below a target line. The Findings report that tibial acceleration and vertical impact-force measures fell after retraining. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Interestingly, giving feedback about end-effector positions only was more effective than feedback about 12 joint centers (or video instruction only) (Eaves et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Eaves et al., 2011 source
The Methods (§2.4; page unavailable) define reduced feedback as wrist and ankle positions, full feedback as 12 joint centers, and no feedback as the third condition. The Discussion (§4; page unavailable) reports a greater learning advantage for reduced feedback than for the other conditions on several measures of the dance movement. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“c o u l dh e l pt om a i n t a i nc o n s i s t e n c y of good rowing performance (Fothergill, 2010)”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Fothergill, 2010 source
The System description says the application provides real-time performance data to help rowers maintain consistency in a coach-described technique. The Conclusion says the small evaluation found it of some use in maintaining consistently good technique, particularly when rowers were fatigued or without their coach. This supports the claim’s cautious wording. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
- Probably not a substantial claim. 62
- It may state two separate claims as one. 118
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“This matches with a theory of optimal motor control, stating that task-irrelevant errors or variability coming from sensory-motor noise should be left untreated to maximize performance (Liu & Todorov, 2007;Todorov, 2004;Todorov & Jordan, 2002;Wei & Körding, 2009;Wolpert et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Liu & Todorov, 2007 source
The Introduction states the minimal intervention principle directly: task-irrelevant deviations should be left uncorrected to maximize performance. The modeling section also describes an optimal controller allowing variability attributable to internal noise while prioritizing task-relevant perturbations. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov, 2004 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov & Jordan, 2002 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Bandwidth feedback has been shown to be effective (Timmermans et al., 2009); however, setting the error threshold is not trivial (Ribeiro et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Timmermans et al., 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section, under “Nature and timing of feedback,” calls bandwidth feedback a useful way to tailor feedback frequency to an individual patient. It does not say that bandwidth feedback has been shown effective, so the cited sentence states the evidence more strongly than this source does. The difficulty of setting the error threshold is attributed to Ribeiro et al., not to Timmermans et al. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ribeiro et al., 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Reduced feedback frequency-that is, fading feedbackseems beneficial for both terminal feedback and concurrent feedback, as was shown in studies on training running technique (Crowell & Davis, 2011) and interlimb out-ofphase coordination (Kovacs & Shea, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in complex tasks
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Crowell & Davis, 2011 source
Crowell and Davis support the running-technique, concurrent-feedback part of the sentence. The Methods describe real-time visual feedback that was progressively removed, and the Discussion reports that reduced loading persisted at the one-month follow-up; the authors suggest the faded-feedback design contributed to that retention. The separate citation, not Crowell and Davis, is offered for the other feedback context. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kovacs & Shea, 2011 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Concurrent, as well as very frequent, feedback was found to be detrimental for simple task learning, but this might not be true for complex, sport-related task learning, which is promoted by a meta-analysis (Marschall, Bund, & Wiemeyer, 2007).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Marschall, Bund, & Wiemeyer, 2007Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Type of task results (page unavailable) find that reduced-frequency feedback improved retention performance on simple laboratory tasks, while sport tasks showed no systematic pattern. The Discussion (page unavailable) likewise says feedback frequency had no influence on learning sport tasks. These passages support the frequency and task-context distinction, but the copy does not establish the separate claim that concurrent feedback harms simple-task learning. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Since humans can recognize complex biological motions by observing only a few point lights placed on a moving body (Giese & Poggio, 2003), point lights can also provide effective feedback, as has been shown for dancing (Eaves et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Giese & Poggio, 2003 source
- Supportedcites Eaves et al., 2011 source
The Methods section describes a point-light display that gave dancers real-time feedback on their joint positions relative to an expert’s movements. The Discussion reports a learning advantage for the reduced-feedback condition and concludes that this feedback can benefit learning a complex dance movement. The separate claim about humans recognizing biological motion is cited to Giese and Poggio, not to Eaves et al. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Too many superimposed parts may overwhelm the learner with too much information; as a consequence, he/she cannot focus on the most relevant ones (Eaves et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Eaves et al., 2011 source
The Discussion says that feedback showing eight additional joint centers may have made it difficult for learners to identify task-relevant features, and describes possible information overload. This supports the claim’s hedged account of excessive visual information interfering with focus. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Auditory feedback may not only reallocate perceptual and cognitive workload, but also reduce distraction, since, unlike visual perception, auditory perception requires neither specific athlete orientation nor a focus of attention (Eldridge, 2006;Grond, Hermann, Verfaille, & Wanderley, 2010;Secoli, Milot, Rosati, & Reinkensmeyer, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Auditory feedback: Three different approaches to enhancing motor learning
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Eldridge, 2006 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Grond et al., 2010 source
- Could not verifycites Secoli et al., 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results > Testing and Validation and Conclusions passages discuss ankle-foot orthoses and gait biomechanics, not auditory feedback. Searches for auditory feedback, workload, distraction, orientation, and attention found no passage in our copy addressing the claim; no page numbers are available. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In simple tasks, the guidance hypothesis as well as the specificity-of-learning hypothesis were confirmed, since concurrent visual feedback increased performance during acquisition, but not during retention tests (Blandin et al., 2008;Proteau, 2005;Proteau & Isabelle, 2002;Ranganathan & Newell, 2009;Robin et al., 2005;Schmidt & Wulf, 1997;Van der Linden et al., 1993).”
§ learning: A review > Conclusion on concurrent visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Blandin et al., 2008 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Proteau, 2005 source
- Could not verifycites Proteau & Isabelle, 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Semantic Scholar returned no full-text snippets for Proteau and Isabelle (2002) on either the acquisition–retention claim or a broader visual-aiming query. Its title concerns visual information in aiming movements, but the available evidence does not establish that it tested the stated feedback effect. An unscoped search found related discussion in other motor-learning papers, with a highest score of 0.485; that is not strong evidence of misattribution, especially because the citing sentence attributes the generalization to several studies. (LLM, conf=0.65)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Especially in very early learning phases, learners seem to benefit from concurrent feedback (Todorov et al., 1997) because it seems to decrease cognitive load (Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Conclusion on concurrent visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov et al., 1997 source
- Partly supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Summary (page unavailable) says that frequent feedback can facilitate learning complex skills with high attentional and memory demands, and reports that concurrent feedback on every trial was most effective for a complex ski-simulator task. It does not establish that concurrent feedback itself decreases cognitive load; the citing sentence attributes the early-learning benefit to Todorov et al., not to Wulf and Shea. (LLM, conf=0.78)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“different pitch heights were used to display obstacle clearance (and subjects could benefit from it) (Erni & Dietz, 2001;Wellner, Schaufelberger, Zitewitz, &R i e n e r ,2008).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Erni & Dietz, 2001 source
The Methods describe different-frequency beeps mapped to measured foot-clearance heights. The Discussion reports improved performance during learning with auditory clearance feedback, supporting the hedged statement that subjects could benefit from the mapping. Our copy provides no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wellner et al., 2008 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“For instance, haptic guidance enhanced motor learning in a steering task (Marchal-Crespo & Reinkensmeyer, 2008b) and motor adaption in wheelchair driving (Marchal-Crespo et al., 2010).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marchal-Crespo & Reinkensmeyer, 2008b source
- Supportedcites Marchal-Crespo et al., 2010 source
The 2010 citation is attached to the wheelchair-driving part of the sentence. The Results report that children trained with haptic guidance improved their unassisted wheelchair steering more than children trained without guidance; the Discussion describes this as improved learning of the steering task in a single session. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Neither of the controllers facilitated learning of shape aspects of the writing task.”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Bluteau et al., 2008 source
The Results for Experiment 1 state that none of the training modes affected the shape-matching criterion for the letter-tracking task. The Discussion likewise reports no effect of training mode on shape matching in either experiment. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“However, the results are controversial: Some studies reported that patients profit more from conventional therapy than from robotaided therapy (Hidler et al., 2009;Hornby et al., 2008), whereas others reported the opposite (Husemann, Muller, Krewer, Heller, & Koenig, 2007;Lo et al., 2010;Mayr et al., 2007).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hidler et al., 2009 source
- Supportedcites Hornby et al., 2008 source
Hornby et al. support the part of the sentence citing them: the Discussion reports greater gait improvements with therapist-assisted than robotic-assisted locomotor training in chronic ambulatory stroke survivors. The studies cited for the opposite result are separate citations, not a finding attributed to Hornby et al. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Husemann et al., 2007 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Haptic guidance may lead to (1) strengthening of muscles and connective tissue, provoking motor plasticity and preventing stiffening; (2) somatosensory stimulation inducing brain plasticity; (3) reinforcement of the movement pattern by movement repetitions; (4) prolonged trainings by relieving therapists from back-breaking work; and (5) increased motivation due to successful active task completion”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Marchal-Crespo & Reinkensmeyer, 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Assistive controllers section (page unavailable) presents somatosensory stimulation, reinforcement through repetition, and motivation from successful movement as possible rationales for assistance. It links effort to motor plasticity and stretching to preventing stiffness, but does not say that guidance strengthens muscles and connective tissue. The passages found do not support the claim that guidance prolongs training by relieving therapists of physically demanding work. (LLM, conf=0.87)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“both visual and visuo-haptic training improved short-term retention of a novel path, whereas position control did not result in any significant improvement (Liu, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2006).”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Liu et al., 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section, “Path tracing accuracy improved following visual or haptic training” (page unavailable), reports significantly improved reproduction of a novel path after both visual demonstration and haptic guidance with vision. The paper does not report a position-control training condition or its effect, and the Methods describe the paths as novel but not overly complex, rather than complex random movements. Its Results also report that performance degraded over a few unguided recall trials. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Furthermore, users behave passively and exert less energy (Israel, Campbell, Kahn, & Hornby, 2006) due to slackness when they execute movements guided by a position controller (Reinkensmeyer, Akoner, Ferris, & Gordon, 2009).”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Israel et al., 2006 source
- Could not verifycites Reinkensmeyer et al., 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses robotic guidance, possible changes in motor-command magnitude, and a slacking term in an adaptive guidance algorithm. It does not say that users become passive or expend less energy when a position controller guides their movements (searched: position controller, passive effort, and slacking). The citing sentence also names different authors from those of the supplied source paper. (LLM, conf=0.75)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The development of meaningful vibrotactile feedback, as well as practical systems, is challenging (Bark et al., 2011;Rosenthal et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Bark et al., 2011 source
The Introduction says challenges remain in developing devices and algorithms for intuitive tactile feedback. The Conclusions explicitly call developing a practical tactile motion-guidance system challenging, and the Background says an optimal way to apply vibrotactile sensations has not been determined. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rosenthal et al., 2011 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Restraining movements of nonimpaired limbs may reduce hyperreliance on healthy limbs and improved impaired limbs (Kolb, 1995;Ogden & Franz, 1917;Ostendorf & Wolf, 1981;Royet, 1991;Sterr et al., 2002;Wolf, Lecraw, Barton, & Jann, 1989).”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kolb, 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ogden & Franz, 1917 source
- Supportedcites Sterr et al., 2002 source
The Treatment section says constraining the unaffected hand promoted use of the affected hand, consistent with reducing reliance on the unaffected limb. The Discussion reports significant improvements in use and movement quality of the affected hand after constraint-induced movement therapy. The study tested restraint together with training, not restraint alone. (LLM, conf=0.87)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Interestingly, some sites might have an initial advantage in representing specific information, due to its naturalness; however, the advantage dissolves when users are given enough time to become familiar with less intuitive sites (Stepp & Matsuoka, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Stepp & Matsuoka, 2011 source
The Discussion says the finger site may offer an initial advantage over other sites, but that the advantage dissipates as users learn to interpret the vibrotactile feedback. It also offers the proximity of finger stimulation to the original feedback source as a possible explanation for that advantage. The finding concerns virtual object manipulation in unimpaired participants during a single session. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Due to training against resistances, subjects can increase muscle strength and self-reported function and further reduce disabilities (Lambercy et al., 2011;Ouellette et al., 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Lambercy et al., 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (The HapticKnob; page unavailable) describe grasp training against a resistive load, and the Discussion (page unavailable) reports increased upper-extremity strength and subjects’ self-reported improvement in daily activities. However, the Discussion says those daily-activity improvements were not confirmed by clinical measures; it does not establish the claimed reduction in disability. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ouellette et al., 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Multimodal integration is believed to follow a general principle; thus, the nervous system weights the information available in each modality in an optimal way (reducing final estimation variance), whereas attention can influence these weights (Alais & Burr, 2004;Ernst & Banks, 2002;v a nB e e r se ta l .,1999).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Alais & Burr, 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion describe weighting visual and auditory estimates by their noise to minimize the variance of the combined estimate. They say attention should be studied as a possible factor, but do not establish that attention influences those weights. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ernst & Banks, 2002 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Beers et al., 1999 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“It might be that the auditory group could keep in mind the target rhythm and move their wrist accordingly, even without auditory feedback in retention tests (Ronsse, Puttemans, et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Ronsse, Puttemans, et al., 2011 source
The Task Description and Procedure describes an auditory target rhythm for the wrist-coordination task. The discussion of brain activation proposes that the auditory group held the ideal auditory template in working memory and developed an internal controller; the Kinematic Data section reports that they largely preserved performance without augmented feedback after training. The claim presents this mechanism as a possibility, matching the paper’s cautious interpretation. (LLM, conf=0.91)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Researchers have assumed that, after training with multimodal stimuli, multimodal processing is activated even if only unimodal stimuli are present (Kim et al., 2008;Seitzetal.,2006;Shams & Seitz, 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Kim et al., 2008 source
The Discussion (page not supplied) suggests that crossmodal interactions facilitate learning and that enhanced visual processing persists on visual-only trials, when auditory input is absent. This supports the citing sentence’s description of an assumption, although the paper says it cannot determine the exact mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Seitz et al., 2006 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shams & Seitz, 2008 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The auditory group did learn; thus, they showed correct coordination even in a retention test.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Ronsse, Puttemans, et al., 2011 source
The Task Description and Procedure section says the auditory group practiced the 90°-out-of-phase wrist pattern using tones triggered at each hand’s turning points. The Scanning and Kinematic Data sections report that, in the post-training test without auditory feedback, the group largely preserved its learned coordination performance. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In particular, learning of temporal aspects can be accelerated with haptic guidance (Marchal-Crespo, McHughen, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2009), which seems also to be true if haptic guidance is added to visual feedback.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Marchal-Crespo, McHughen, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2009 source
The Discussion reports that haptic guidance improved learning of precisely timed steering movements, particularly correcting course after curves. The Steering simulator and guidance controller section describes a visually displayed circuit, and the Experimental protocol compares participants who received haptic guidance with those who did not; both groups used the visual display. This supports the hedged claim about adding haptic guidance to visual feedback. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Up to now, mostly low-dimensional, simple, and rather artificial labor tasks have been investigated even though, in real life, most motor tasks are multidimensional and complex (Winstein, 1991;Wulf & Shea, 2002).”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Winstein, 1991 source
- Supportedcites Wulf & Shea, 2002 source
The Summary, Future Directions, and Conclusions section (page not provided) says relatively simple tasks have long predominated in motor-learning research. The paper also characterizes simple tasks as often artificial and involving one degree of freedom, while calling for more study of complex, multi-degree-of-freedom and real-world skills. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the impact of the additionally available visual display (described in the visual section before) remains unclear, and a comparison with differently designed auditory feedbacks in order to evaluate its effectiveness has neither been reported by this research group.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, an evaluation of the interpretability and practicability of such a sonification of multiple movement variables has rarely been done.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most of the reported auditory displays were based on a steady signal, which may get annoying after some time.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, several auditory feedback designs have been presented for motor learning, but their interpretability and effectiveness have rarely been evaluated.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Until now, haptic guidance has been successfully applied mainly in simple motor tasks, such as guided point-to-point movements or reaching tasks (e.g., Amirabdollahian, Loureiro, &Harwin, 2002;Flash & Gurevich, 1991;Goodbody & Wolpert, 1998;Loureiro, Amirabdollahian, Coote, Stokes, & Harwin, 2001;Loureiro, Amirabdollahian, Topping, Driessen, &H a r w i n , 2003;Sainburg & Ghez, 1995;Todorov, 2004)”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet the potential of position control to facilitate motor learning has rarely been tested but should be evaluated.”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since only a few studies have applied haptic guidance on complex motor tasks, which were also quite diverse, the general potential of haptic guidance to facilitate motor learning of complex movements remains open.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“So far, a proof-ofconcept has been provided; the impact of this controller on motor learning has yet to be evaluated.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rauter et al., 2011 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, until now, such emphasizing control strategies have been neither developed nor investigated in a systematic way.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Still, the strongest feature of position control is its instructional character, which has hardly been investigated and might have been underestimated in the field of motor learning to date.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To our knowledge, concurrent augmented audiohaptic, or even audiovisuohaptic feedback, for motor learning has not been investigated so far.”
§ learning: A review > Multimodal feedback is promising
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vibrotactile feedback devices have been applied in sports, but learning has generally not been assessed.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most results on the effectiveness of haptic feedback have emerged from studies of simple motor tasks, and only a few from complex motor tasks, such as in sports.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The impact of the visual feedback and that of the haptic feedback were not assessed separately.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Earlier studies on simple tasks found that concurrent feedback is detrimental for motor learning, but more recent studies have revealed that concurrent feedback can be effective if the motor task to be learned is complex (Fig. 1).”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in general, retention tests without audiovisual feedback have not been done so far but should be included in future studies in order to assess the impact of audiovisual feedback on motor learning.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Visuohaptic information was used to enhance task realism, rather than to give augmented feedback.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, a large diversity of movements have been investigated so far, but a systematic evaluation within movement classes is lacking.”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, this review shows that research on multimodal feedback in complex motor learning is still in its early phases, since not many studies have been reported.”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“At a behavioral level, motor learning can be characterized by three different phases (Fitts & Posner, 1967;Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Definitions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fitts & Posner, 1967
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In general, concurrent feedback can enhance performance in the acquisition phase, but the performance gains are lost in retention tests.”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Concurrent feedback may decrease cognitive load since it attracts an external focus of attention (Wulf, 2007a), which has been confirmed in a balancing task on a stabilometer (Shea & Wulf, 1999).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in complex tasks
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wulf, 2007a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shea & Wulf, 1999 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Self-controlled terminal feedback has been proven to be more effective than externally imposed terminal feedback in ball throwing (Janelle, Barba, Frehlich, Tennant, & Cauraugh, 1997;Janelle, Kim, & Singer, 1995), in sequential timing tasks with the index finger (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005), and in a motor perception task requiring walking through virtual sliding doors on a treadmill (Huet, C”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Janelle, Barba, Frehlich, Tennant, & Cauraugh, 1997 source
- Not matchedcites Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Huet, Camachon, Fernandez, Jacobs, & Montagne, 2009 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It seems that feedback is most effective if it is provided after good trials, due to enhanced motivation and positive reinforcement to repeat good trials (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2007).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2007 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Datafrom studies on simple tasks reflect the second phase of learning, where studies of complex tasks provide insights about the processes occurring in the first phase.”
§ learning: A review > Definitions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Accordingly, concurrent feedback may change the task (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008), and performance is expected to decrease when the feedback information is withdrawn-that is, performance in the original task.”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Besides self-efficacy, self-estimation of movement error is also stated to facilitate motor learning (Guadagnoli & Kohl, 2001;Liu & Wrisberg, 1997), due to a better development of error detection capabilities (Swinnen, Schmidt, Nicholson, & Shapiro, 1990).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, these studies in physical therapy showed that concurrent feedback can contribute to enhancement of motor learning.However, it was not shown to be more effective than terminal feedback.”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in complex tasks
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study by Wishart, Lee, Cunningham, and Murdoch (2002) of the same task, younger adults could profit from both terminal and concurrent feedback, whereas older adults could profit from concurrent visual feedback only (Wishart et al., 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in complex tasks
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wishart et al., 2002 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Functional task complexity depends on the current individual skill level and changes during the learning process, whereas nominal task complexity remains invariant (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Delaying terminal feedback for a few seconds is believed to allow sufficient time for selfestimation of the error to prevent reliance on extrinsic feedback (van Vliet & Wulf, 2006).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Vliet & Wulf, 2006 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The guidance hypothesis, which states that permanent feedback during acquisition leads to a dependency on the feedback (Salmoni, 1984;Schmidt, 1991;Schmidt, Young, Swinnen, & Shapiro, 1989).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“To get an idea of the targeted movement, feedback in complex tasks should be prescriptive-that is, feedback should inform the learner on how to correct the errorrather than descriptive (i.e., information about occurrence of an error) (Tzetzis, Votsis, & Kourtessis, 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tzetzis, Votsis, & Kourtessis, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“During acquisition of a simple lever arm movement, a concurrent visual feedback group outperformed a no-feedback group (Schmidt & Wulf, 1997).However, in the retention tests when feedback was withdrawn, accuracy and stability degraded in the feedback group, as compared with the no-feedback group.”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in simple tasks
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schmidt & Wulf, 1997 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As compared with terminal feedback, concurrent visual feedback has led to a better performance during acquisition.However, in retention tests, the concurrent visual feedback groups performed worse than the terminal feedback groups.”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in simple tasks
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Bandwidth feedback-that is, feedback when the movement error exceeds (or is within) a certain threshold (Ribeiro et al., 2011) -should force the learner to repeat good trials (Winstein, 1991).”
§ learning: A review > Important contextual insights gained from studies on visual feedback
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, feedback about complex multidimensional movements in 3-D space can hardly be abstracted but must be displayed in a more natural way.”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Focusing on end-effector movements, besides forcing an external focus of attention, might also be beneficial, since end-effector kinematics are believed to play a key role in motor control (Todorov et al., 1997).”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov et al., 1997 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such virtual teacher approaches are very popular and, also, effective, as the subsequently discussed studies verify.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The design of a visual feedback may have a significant impact on the outcome; for example, reduced visibility fostered learning more than did fully visible feedback (Robin et al., 2005).”
§ learning: A review > Visual feedback in complex tasks
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Robin et al., 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For a complex 2-D out-of-phase coordination task, Lissajous-type feedback that displayed relative phase of both hands facilitated performance dramatically, but learning was not assessed (Boyles, Panzer, & Shea, 2012).”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Boyles, Panzer, & Shea, 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Animations can have an advantage over real videos, because the animations can be reduced to the most relevant information, as has been shown in an assembly task (Petzold et al., 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Petzold et al., 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such an aesthetic feedback approach may motivate the learner to train longer than with a simple and abstract visualization.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“To instruct movement tasks, abstract sketches have been shown to be more effective than real pictures, but also more effective than a very abstract stickman illustration (Kruber, 1984).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of visual feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kruber, 1984
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, in some cases, not only the end-effector, but also the whole-body or limb movement must be optimized to prevent learning of uneconomic and compensatory movements.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, in the long run, they might become boring and, thus, hinder the learning process by demotivation.”
§ learning: A review > Abstract visualizations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, as in many studies involving visual feedback, a comparison with other feedback designs has not been reported, and retention was not tested; thus, conclusions on how visualizations should be designed cannot be drawn in general.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Harmonics were used to represent arm position, rhythm represented the smoothness of the movement, and auditory alarms were used to indicate a successful movement, as well as a compensatory movement (the severity of the compensation was mapped to loudness) (Chen et al., 2006;Huang et al., 2005).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“such as stereo balance for deviations in the horizontal plane (applied by Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011), rhythm for deviations in time, or reverb for the distance to the target (Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Rhythm and pitch height discrimination depend not on age (as long as young children are not compared with the elderly) but on gender, since females have shown better discrimination abilities (Mauney & Walker, 2007).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mauney & Walker, 2007
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When allowed, most subjects chose the state-indicative polarity, which seems to be more intuitive at first glance.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Contradicting the guidance hypothesis, most studies on more complex tasks showed positive effects of concurrent visual feedback (Lee et al., 1990;S h e a&W u l f ,1999; Snodgrass et al., 2010;Swinnen et al., 1997;Todorov et al., 1997;Wishart et al., 2002;Wulf et al., 1999;Wulf et al., 1998).”
§ learning: A review > Conclusion on concurrent visual feedback
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Applied functions and metaphors have to be carefully selected, since listening to auditory displays is less common than viewing visual displays.”
§ learning: A review > Auditory feedback: Three different approaches to enhancing motor learning
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Listening to auditory displays is less common than viewing visual displays.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such a carrier signal may work for auditory alarms, but neither for movement sonification nor for error sonification, since those sonifications require a continuous mapping to facilitate continuous movement corrections.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The interpretability and effectiveness of the display depend further on the athlete, particularly with respect to age, gender, skill level, and musical abilities (Effenberg & Mechling, 1999).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Effenberg & Mechling, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This method was applied in a rowing task without explicitly reporting on its effectiveness (Gauthier, 1985).”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Gauthier, 1985 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In our early days, the haptic sense lays the foundation for sensory integration-that is, the organization of sensory information for use in daily life (Ayres, 2005).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic feedback: Many concepts, few proofs
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ayres, 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, if multiple aspects of a movement should be mapped, music as a carrier signal is limited, since continuity is hardly given in its features; thus, multiple error sonification seems hardly possible.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In comparison with visual feedback, auditory feedback may hinder processing of other sensory afferences to a lesser extent, and thereby, it could still be used to calibrate the motor program like sparse visual information.”
§ learning: A review > Conclusion on concurrent auditory feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Visual concurrent feedback may also emphasize the linkage of landmarks or key features of the motor task to kinesthetic information, which may facilitate a recall in no-feedback conditions.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such tasks limit online movement corrections-that is, corrections of irrelevant errors caused by sensory-motor noise; instead, the auditory information supports the feedforward control.”
§ learning: A review > Conclusion on concurrent auditory feedback
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Moreover, to reduce dependency on concurrent feedback, the addition of very frequent terminal feedback seems to be helpful (Blandin et al., 2008), which might also be realized by displaying lasting visual traces.”
§ learning: A review > Natural visualizations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Blandin et al., 2008 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One may speculate that the direction-indicative polarity will facilitate a corrective movement more than will the state-indicative polarity, since the required movement direction is directly presented.”
§ learning: A review > Design aspects of auditory feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, users seemed to become dependent on feedback through haptic guidance, promoting the guidance hypothesis.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Haptic guidance strategies that allow irrelevant errors caused by noise in the sensory-motor system may mediate not only the new motor program in an early learning phase, but also the improvement of correct error detection/correction mechanisms in a later phase.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This could be due to the instructional character of position control, which might be useful only in an early learning phase.”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Often, the artificially generated trajectories are smooth functions that are based on optimality principles approximating human motor control, such as minimal jerk, minimal torque, and minimal torque change (Todorov, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov, 2004 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In several experiments and retention tests on auditory-motor short-term memory tasks, the advantage of haptic guidance over auditory feedback and audio-haptic feedback over haptic guidance could be demonstrated (Lewiston, 2009).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lewiston, 2009
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lack of studies on healthy subjects using haptic guidance in complex tasks might be caused by hardly available or affordable haptic interfaces supporting complex tasks in several DOFs and insufficient computer performance to control the desired number of DOFs.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This freedom may facilitate motor learning (Scheidt et al., 2000)”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Scheidt et al., 2000 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, position control may be useful for novices who do not know the desired movement at all or for less skilled or impaired subjects who are not physically able to perform a movement task.”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In a recent control concept, the haptic controller does not rely on reference trajectories and supports arbitrary rhythmic movements of the user.To do so, the controller uses adaptive oscillators that synchronize with the sinusoidal high-level features of the user's movements (Ronsse, Koopman et al., 2011;Ronsse et al., 2010;Ronsse, Vitiello, et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Especially in early learning of complex motor tasks, position control may help to acquire a first movement representation.”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The few existing studies on complex motor tasks revealed that haptic guidance reduces the perceived workload, improves the current performance, and enhances motor learning (Brickman et al., 1996).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Brickman et al., 1996 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Spatial separation of haptic guidance and task-inherent forces could be of importance, since combini n gt h o s ef o r c e sm i g h tl e a dt ol e a r n i n gt h ew r o n gt a s k (Marchal-Crespo & Reinkensmeyer, 2008a).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Marchal-Crespo & Reinkensmeyer, 2008a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As an instruction, position control may represent the first impetus that starts the process of motor learning, since the need for support depends on the user's skill level (Cesqui et al., 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Position-control-based haptic guidance: Feasible for movement instruction?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cesqui et al., 2008 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, feedback adaptation might have in general a large impact on motor learning and should be investigated more intensely in future.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reason why conventional therapy through human physiotherapists can still be more effective than robot-aided therapy seems to be based on the fact that a human therapist can adapt his strategy and amount of haptic guidance.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These results are also supported by the challenge point theory stating that advanced users can profit from challenging feedback but novices cannot (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Applications in sports are diverse: Vibrotactile displays have been applied to give information about tactics in soccer (van Erp et al., 2006), about the aerodynamic posture in skating and cycling (van Erp, Saturday, & Jansen, 2006), about the coordination of multiple dancers (van Erp et al., 2006), about dancing skills (Nakamura et al., 2005, Rosenthal et al., 2011), or about snowboarding skills”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Applying a meaningful, intuitive metaphor is believed to be crucial for vibrotactile feedback (Spelmezan, Hilgers, & Borchers, 2009;Spelmezan, Jacobs, et al., 2009), especially if the task becomes more complex (Jansen et al., 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Spelmezan, Hilgers, & Borchers, 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Spelmezan, Jacobs, et al., 2009 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jansen et al., 2004
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This type of control relieves the human subject from the burden of his/her own limb weight and helps the subject to focus on the motor task.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the tennis-type task, three different control concepts were implemented-position control, path control, and guidance-as-needed controller-in order to investigate the influence of different haptic guidance concepts on task timing, whereby learning was not assessed (Marchal-Crespo et al., 2012).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marchal-Crespo et al., 2012 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For experts, haptic guidance could be effective in teaching detailed technique aspects that can make the difference in professional sports.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The preference for the repulsive or attractive mode might also depend on the vibration properties, since unpleasant vibrations are meant to be avoided, whereas neutral or even pleasant vibrations could attract a movement direction.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to increased motor function, increased functional potential for motor learning, especially in the impaired limbs, could be expected.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In general, vibrotactile displays have mainly been developed to improve navigation and orientation in order to reduce workload of the visual and auditory system-for example, for steering an airplane (van Erp et al., 2006).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites van Erp et al., 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In contrast, a preference for the attractive mode was found for initiation of wrist rotations (Jansen, Oving, & Van Veen, 2004) and also for auditory feedback guiding oar movements in rowing (Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jansen et al., 2004
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sigrist, Schellenberg, et al., 2011 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, other designs that are also effective for rotational movements can still be found.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, it has been shown that skilled subjects may profit from learning with error amplification rather than from haptic guidance, in contrast to less skilled subjects (Cesqui et al., 2008;Milot, Marchal-Crespo, Green, Cramer, & Reinkensmeyer, 2010).”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This might prevent cognitive overload and, therefore, might enhance motor learning.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For instance, Burke et al. (2006) has stated that people have different cognitive resources for information processing, even though not all can be used simultaneously without interference.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Burke et al., 2006 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This theory refers to the multiple-resource theory of Wickens (2002), which states that a distribution of information to different modalities is superior than providing the same amount of information in one modality.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wickens, 2002 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Error augmentation was shown to outperform other haptic control strategies, since it intensifies error-based learning.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both unimodal processors are believed to be controlled by the central executive, declared to be an attentional-controlling system, but being largely functionally independent.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Vision is very precise in the perception of spatial information, whereas hearing is very precise in the perception of temporal information (Freides, 1974;Nesbitt, 2003;Welch & Warren, 1980).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Therefore, it is suggested that augmented information should be displayed in the appropriate modality (Huang et al., 2005), according to the modality appropriateness hypothesis (Welch & Warren, 1980), or in a multimodal way, since imperfect estimations gained by one modality can be improved by more precise information in another modality (Hecht & Reiner, 2009;van Beers, Sittig, & Gon, 1999).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Researchers have suggested that the threshold of neural activation is reached earlier by multimodal learning than by unimodal learning (Seitz & Dinse, 2007;Shams & Seitz, 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“For instance, moving a pen inside a cyclic path was rated to be most comfortable with audiovisual alarm-type feedback, but accuracy was best with tactile or audiovisuotactile feedback (Sun, Ren, & Cao, 2011).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sun, Ren, & Cao, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other control strategies relieve subjects from their own weight and, thus, might enable learning of tasks that would exceed the learner's physical abilities.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The multiple-resource theory is in line with Baddeley's( 1992) theory of working memory; visual-spatial information is maintained in one area, and auditory-verbal information in another area of the working memory.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baddeley, 1992 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Not only are humans used to processing stimuli in different modalities at the same time, but also multimodal information even facilitates acting in the world.”
§ learning: A review > Multimodal feedback is promising
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The perception of haptics can fulfill relatively high demands on processing both temporal and spatial information (Nesbitt, 2003) and is believed to be the most direct form of motor information (Lieberman & Breazeal, 2007), because haptic feedback can mechanically change the movement by applying forces on the body.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nesbitt, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lieberman & Breazeal, 2007 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Indeed, users preferred multimodal to unimodal interaction when complexity of a task was increased, which indicates that users self-manage resources of the working memory by shifting from unimodal to multimodal interaction with increasing cognitive demands (Oviatt, Coulston, & Lunsford, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Oviatt, Coulston, & Lunsford, 2004 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Many researchers believe that the positive effect of multimodal learning originates from a reduction of the cognitive load due to a distribution of information processing.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All these findings on memory and cognitive load imply that if workload is high in one modality, augmented feedback should be given in another modality or in a multimodal way.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Especially in patients, they seem to be useful in motor (re-)learning because of their motivational aspect provided through successful task completion and increased training duration and intensity.”
§ learning: A review > Augmenting the movement errors or the environment
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Importantly, it has also been suggested that multimodal learning strengthens multimodal representations and the connections between the unimodal areas (Shams & Seitz, 2008).”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shams & Seitz, 2008 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These findings are in agreement with the multiple-resource theory described earlier (Wickens, 2002): Since vision is highly loaded in navigation tasks, a distribution of augmented information to the visual and auditory modalities is appropriate.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wickens, 2002 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Note that a flight or a drive task has a high demand on cognition, whereas the motor task is quite simple (Todorov et al., 1997).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Todorov et al., 1997 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, in interaction tasks studied with navigation simulators, the provision of augmented information in an audiovisual way increased flight performance (Bronkhorst, Veltman, & Van Breda, 1996;Tannen, Nelson, Bolia, Warm, & Dember, 2004) or driving performance (Liu, 2001).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“An intelligent virtual trainer feedback system, introduced by Rauter, Baur, Sigrist, Riener, and Wolf (2010) can switch feedback modality, feedback variables or movement features, and target thresholds in order to provide optimized and individualized training.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rauter, Baur, Sigrist, Riener, and Wolf, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For trajectory learning, the use of visuohaptic displays to provide augmented information was reported to be beneficial mainly in reducing spatial errors, but not exclusively.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, training with haptic guidance alone enhanced the timing-related performance, whereas visual training alone facilitated learning of position and shape (Feygin et al., 2002).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Feygin et al., 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Therewith, an engaging, multimodal feedback design was present that enhanced performance during the reaching task (Chen et al., 2006;Huang et al., 2005;Wallis et al., 2007).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lack of studies in this area might originate from the huge technical effort that is needed to provide augmented haptic feedback for complex movements in sports.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Besides the self-regulation of feedback frequency, self-controlled feedback has the advantage that it highly involves and motivates the learner (Wulf, 2007b) and may also promote self-efficacy.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wulf, 2007b source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In dancing, performance was more enhanced while having vibrotactile timing cues than by video instruction; however, retention was not tested (Nakamura et al., 2005).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nakamura et al., 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, augmented visual feedback could facilitate learning of spatial aspects of the movement effectively, and at the same time, auditory feedback could support learning of temporal aspects.”
§ learning: A review > Conclusions on multimodal feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the basis of research on learning related to information processing and motion perception, positive effects of the provision of information in a multimodal way can be expected.”
§ learning: A review > Theoretical considerations promoting multimodal feedback
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In that meta-analysis, it is suggested that the use of both the auditory and the visual channel increases workload because the two modalities are cognitively linked (Burke et al., 2006).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Burke et al., 2006 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“With such a system, learners can always be challenged adequately, which is important for successful motor learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Particularly in the early, attention-demanding learning phase, concurrent augmented feedback may help the novice to understand the new structure of the movement faster and prevent cognitive overload, which may accelerate the learning process.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a simple ball-balancing computer game, subjects preferred combined haptic and visual feedback to visual feedback only; however, performance was not enhanced, due to the addition of haptic feedback (Swindells, Unden, & Sang, 2003).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Swindells, Unden, & Sang, 2003 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, multimodal information could have enhanced performance, due to increased precision of perception, neural activity, and neural representation.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In a small study on a simple arm movement, subjects benefited slightly more from visuo-vibrotactile feedback than from visual feedback only and least from vibrotactile feedback only (Ruffaldi, Filippeschi, et al., 2009).”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ruffaldi, Filippeschi, et al., 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Besides the sonification, the no-sound-period during the flying phase of the jump could have facilitated the estimation, since the pause was directly correlated with the jump height.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Concurrent augmented feedback may also be beneficial for experts, since learning of specific details of the movement can be complex, when the expert has to overcome automated but incorrect movement.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regarding the reviewed studies, it is conceivable that audiovisual concurrent feedback could have positive effects on motor learning.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Still, selections might not be optimal, because learners' self-estimation of their current performance might be wrong and learners might not have the valuable expertise of a trainer who knows which actions are needed to make progress.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The audiovisual condition led to the best estimation of the jump height and to the highest reproducibility.”
§ learning: A review > Audiovisual feedback enhances perception
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Effenberg, 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recently, Krakauer and Mazzoni (2011) suggested that an explicit s t r a t e g ym a yh e l pt os o l v et h e task, or explicit cognitive processes could enhance implicit processes.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Krakauer and Mazzoni, 2011 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within movement classes, it might be possible to transfer gained knowledge about effectiveness of a certain augmented feedback strategy in the future.”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“As has been highlighted recently, there is a strong need to more carefully validate the effectiveness of (sports) simulator training-that is, the transferability of the trained skills to the real world (Miles, Pop, Watt, Lawrence, & John, 2012;Ruffaldi et al., 2011).”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Task complexity, feedback designs, feedback variables, and modalities can be manipulated in order to optimally challenge the learner, a main factor for accelerating motor learning (Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004).”
§ learning: A review > General conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guadagnoli & Lee, 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accordingly, augmented feedback might be very effective if it provides information (explicitly) that mediates the relevant aspects of the movement implicitly to best enhance performance in no-feedback conditions.”
§ learning: A review > General suggestions on future application of augmented feedback
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper relies on this without support.
The best way to provide augmented feedback is a matter of controversy.
“However, discussion of the way to most effectively provide augmented feedback has been controversial.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Prior studies have mainly used simple or artificial tasks with visual feedback.
“Related studies have focused primarily on simple or artificial tasks enhanced by visual feedback.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Recent technical advances allow researchers to study complex realistic motor tasks and to use auditory, haptic, or multimodal feedback.
“Recently, technical advances have made it possible also to investigate more complex, realistic motor tasks and to implement not only visual, but also auditory, haptic, or multimodal augmented feedback.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Intrinsic feedback is always present during motor learning.
“Intrinsic or internal feedbacks-that is, sensory afferences-are always present during motor learning.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The effect of error visualization type on visual augmented feedback effectiveness has not been systematically evaluated.
“In general, the impact of the type of error visualization-that is, of the actual and the desired motor behavior-on the effectiveness of visual augmented feedback has not been systematically evaluated so far.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Knowledge about how to design simulators with augmented feedback to exploit their potential is still limited.
“However, to date, knowledge about how to design simulators including augmented feedback in order to exploit their potential is still limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most concurrent feedback is displayed visually because this is seen as natural and easy.
“Most commonly, concurrent feedback is displayed visually, since this is, at first glance, the most natural and easiest way.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Many motor tasks are impossible or much harder without vision.
“Many motor tasks are impossible or, at least, are much harder to perform without vision-for example, walking on an uneven terrain, hitting a tennis ball, or skiing.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The optimal rate for fading feedback is usually unknown.
“However, the optimal fading rate is commonly unknown.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Different visualizations have rarely been compared systematically in motor learning.
“A systematic comparison of different visualizations has rarely been done in the field of motor learning”
The paper relies on this without support.
Out-of-phase coordination tasks require controlling two independent effectors according to a common movement plan.
“The challenge of out-of-phase coordination tasks is that two independent effectors have to be controlled in accordance with a common movement plan.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most sports are cognitively mastered in response to visually perceived information.
“Although auditory information has an impact on performance, most sports are cognitively mastered in response to visually perceived information.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Listening to auditory displays is less common than viewing visual displays.
“Applied functions and metaphors have to be carefully selected, since listening to auditory displays is less common than viewing visual displays.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Position control is ineffective for motor learning because the central nervous system loops between proprioceptive input and motor output are not strengthened.
“Position control is assumed to be ineffective for motor learning because those motor control loops in the central nervous system between proprioceptive input and motor output are not strengthened even though they are important especially for improving dynamic tasks (Shadmehr & Mussa-Ivaldi, 1994).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
A ceiling effect impeded learning in both vibrotactile and visual feedback conditions in expert rowers.
“However, a ceiling effect was present and was assumed to impede learning in either condition (van Erp et al., 2006).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Pitch changes of 10% are noticeable by almost every healthy learner.
“but in principle, pitch changes of 10 % should be noticeable by almost every healthy learner.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The optimal motor-learning condition is an environment that challenges users according to their actual performance, learning progress, individual skills, and biomechanics.
“In general, the optimal learning condition may be given in an environment that challenges users depending on actual performance, learning progress, individual skills, and biomechanics.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Supplementing vision with auditory information can increase operator's awareness, especially during high visual load [2], [26].”
From Study of Multimodal Interfaces and the Improvements on Teleoperation (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In addition, multimodal design decisions are of paramount importance before implementing any kind of sensory feedback [2].”
From Study of Multimodal Interfaces and the Improvements on Teleoperation (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These results provide evidence to the untested hypothesis of [2].”
From Study of Multimodal Interfaces and the Improvements on Teleoperation (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Augmented feedback, through the use of visual, auditory or haptic modalities, has been shown to effectively enhances motor learning [38].”
From Eyes-Off Your Fingers: Gradual Surface Haptic Feedback Improves Eyes-Free Touchscreen Interaction (2022) · cites this paper as [38]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ learning: A review > Multimodal feedback is promising
“To our knowledge, concurrent augmented audiohaptic, or even audiovisuohaptic feedback, for motor learning has not been investigated so far.”
§ learning: A review > Haptic guidance beyond position control: Many suggestions, no systematic evaluation
“Sequential finger-pressing movements in piano playing have also been guided by a haptic device employing magnetic forces.In several experiments and retention tests on auditory-motor short-term memory tasks, the advantage of haptic guidance over auditory feedback and audio-haptic feedback over haptic guidance could be demonstrated (Lewiston, 2009).”
Citations
Cites
Real-Time Obstacle Avoidance for Manipulators and Mobile Robots
Khatib, O. (1986) · The International Journal of Robotics Research · doi:10.1177/027836498600500106 · Cited by 7,894
Baddeley, A. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1736359 · Cited by 5,258
Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion
Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/415429a · Cited by 4,844
The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model
Flash, T., & Hogan, N. (1985) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.05-07-01688.1985 · Cited by 4,395
Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination
Todorov, E., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn963 · Cited by 3,081 · cited 3×
“It might also be interesting to investigate whether distinct feedback design in a specific modality can lead to a faster minimization of cost functions discussed in optimal motor control theories (Friston, 2011; Todorov, 2004; Todorov & Jordan, 2002).”
BackgroundImpedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation
Hogan, N. (1984) · Proceedings of the ... American Control Conference/Proceedings of the American Control Conference · doi:10.23919/acc.1984.4788393 · Cited by 2,964
Multiple resources and performance prediction
Wickens, C. D. (2002) · Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science · doi:10.1080/14639220210123806 · Cited by 2,621 · cited 2×
“This theory refers to the multiple-resource theory of Wickens (2002), which states that a distribution of information to different modalities is superior than providing the same amount of information in one modality.”
BackgroundResultAdaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task
Shadmehr, R., & Mussa-Ivaldi, F. (1994) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.14-05-03208.1994 · Cited by 2,612
The Ventriloquist Effect Results from Near-Optimal Bimodal Integration
Alais, D., & Burr, D. (2004) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.01.029 · Cited by 1,936
Optimality principles in sensorimotor control
Todorov, E. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1309 · Cited by 1,746
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Chollet, D., Madani, M., & Micallef, J. P. (1992). Biomechanics and medicine in swimming, chapter Effects of two types of biomechanical bio-feedback on crawl performance (pp. 57–62). London: E & FN Spon.
- Chollet, D., Micallef, J. P., & Rabischong, P. (1988). Swimming Science V, chapter Biomechanical signals for external biofeedback to improve swimming techniques (pp. 389–396). Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Books.
- Effenberg, A. O. (2000b). Zum Potential komplexer akustischer Bewegungsinformationen für die Technikansteuerung. Leistungssport, 5, 19–25.
- Effenberg, A., & Mechling, H. (1999). Zur Funktion audiomotorischer Verhaltenskomponenten. Sportwissenschaft, 29, 200–215.
- Effenberg, A. O., & Mechling, H. (1998). Bewegung hörbar machen — Warum? Zur Perspektive einer systematischen Umsetzung von Bewegung in Klänge. Psychologie und Sport, 5(1), 28–38.
- Flash, T., & Gurevich, I. (1991). Human motor adaptation to external loads (Vol. 13).
- Grey, J. M. (1975). An Exploration of Musical Timbre. PhD thesis, CCRMA Dept. of Music, Stanford University.
- Ho, C., Basdogan, C., Slater, M., Durlach, N., & Srinivasan, M. (1998). An experiment on the influence of haptic communication on the sense of being together. In BT Presence Workshop. Citeseer.
- Kruber, D. (1984). Untersuchung zur visuellen Gestaltung von Arbeitskarten im Sport. In R. Daugs (Ed.), 1. Berliner Workshop Medien im Sport: Visualisation sensomotorischer Lehrmedien (pp. 67–79). Berlin, Germany: Akademieschrift der FVA des DSB.
- Mononen, K. (2007). The effect of augmented feedback on motor skill learning in shooting. PhD thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Finland.
- Neuhoff, J. G., & Wayand, J. (2002). Pitch change, sonification, and musical expertise: Which way is up? In International Conference on Auditory Displays, Kyoto, Japan.
- Ohta, K., Umegaki, K., Murofushi, K., A., K., & Sakurai, S. (2009). Training aid system for hammer throw based on accelerometry. In Proceedings of the XXIInd Congress of the International Society of Biomechanics.
- Rochat, P., & Senders, S. (1991). Active touch in infancy: Action systems in development. Infant attention: Biological constraints and the influence of experience (pp. 412–442).
- Underwood, S. M. (2009). Effects of augmented real-time auditory feedback on top-level precision shoting performance. Master’s thesis, University of Kentucky.
- Van der Linde, R. Q., Lammertse, P., Frederiksen, E., & Ruiter, B. (2002). The hapticmaster, a new high-performance haptic interface. In Proceedings of Eurohaptics (pp. 1–5). Citeseer.
- Vogt, K. (2008). Sonification in computational physics-qcd-audio. In Proceedings of SysMus-1st International Conference of Students of Systematic Musicology, Graz, Austria.
- Walker, B. N., & Nees, M. A. (2011). Theory of sonification, volume The Sonification Handbook. New York: Academic Press.
- Wallis, I., Ingalls, T., Rikakis, T., Olson, L., Chen, Y., Xu, W., & Sundaram, H. (2007). Real-time sonification of movement for an immersive stroke rehabilitation environment. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Auditory Display, Montréal, Canada.
- Yamamoto, G., Shiraki, K., Takahata, M., Sakane, Y., & Takebayashi, Y. (2004). Multimodal knowledge for designing new sound environments. In The International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Citeseer.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,301–1,398 of 1,398
Djadja, D. J. D. (2023) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/6d2ffce8z54d3z4b28za5b9zc7fb4650c0d7
Connan, J.-F. (2023) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/20cceec4ze100z4bffzb3d5z9d7bbf4eb2f9
Altamira, G. H. (2024) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/3053c2dbz1722z4208zadd5zd005b633e11e
Heart failure rehabilitation through virtual reality: an evidence-based rapid review
Rios-García, W., Barrientos-Ventura, E., Butrón-Verástegui, V. E., Oriundo-Arbizu, D. E., Velasquez-Taipe, K. A., & Rios-Garcia, A. A. (2026) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s10389-026-02751-x
“Immersion in digital environments induces simultaneous cognitive–motor stimulation and provides a multisensory experience that activates brain networks associated with visual perception, spatial orientation, motor planning, and decision-making (Sigrist et al. 2013; Gangemi et al. 2023).”
ArtfulSign: A Closed-Loop, Semantics-Grounded Mobile System for Learning Chinese Sign Language
Zhao, Y., Wang, Y., Tan, C., Tong, S., Yao, D., & Zhen, W. (2026) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3772363.3799131
“The system observes performance, evaluates it, and provides immediate feedback that shapes the next attempt [4, 8].”
InfluentialGuo, S., Zhang, F., Krogmeier, C., Kao, D., & Mousas, C. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790629
“Building on these embodiment findings, recent approaches recognize that effective motor learning interventions require the integration of multimodal feedback, with research demonstrating that combined visual-auditory-haptic systems outperform unimodal approaches [88, 96].”
Crosstalk Between Auditory and Visual information in Motor Learning and Savings
White, O. (2026) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.70502
Iso, N., Suzuki, M., Okabe, T., Saito, K., Cho, K., Matsumoto, T., Suzuki, T., Arihara, N., & Yamamoto, J. (2026) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/89302
“These findings support the validity of VRactice’s design philosophy, which emphasizes not only post hoc feedback correction but also proactive feedforward cueing tailored to individual ability for shaping accurate movement trajectories [10,17,24,45].”
InfluentialFashkhami, A. N., Mohammadi, M., Fashkhami, S. N., et al. (2026) · Health Science Reports · doi:10.1002/hsr2.71863
Beyond Deterministic Mappings: Audiovisual Correspondence in Movement-Controlled Generative Music
Kantan, P. R. (2026) · International Conference on Movement and Computing (MOCO) · doi:10.1145/3802842.3802860
“Strong crossmodal coherence enhances motor learning [32, 41], improves movement quality in rehabilitation settings [1, 20], and increases user engagement with electronic musical instruments [15].”
Battles as Interactive Ecologies: Designing with Embodied Roles in Hip-Hop Performance
Grebel, L., Alaoui, S. F., & Bevilacqua, F. P. (2026) · International Conference on Movement and Computing (MOCO) · doi:10.1145/3802842.3802868
Reflective Embodiment through Avatar Abstraction: Insights from Movement Practitioners
Akbas, S., Kuşçu, K., Eskenazi, T., & Yantaç, A. E. (2026) · International Conference on Movement and Computing (MOCO) · doi:10.1145/3802842.3802857 · Cited by 1
“While research shows that internal focus of attention can interfere with motor automaticity [72, 73], XR avatar embodiment can present mechanical information externally — allowing practitioners to observe their own movement from outside without the typical costs of internal focus [7, 23, 60].”
Che, R., Li, J., Chi, D. E. N. G., Mao, Q., Ho, J. C. F., Nah, F., Or, C. K., & Wang, H. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2026.103826 · Cited by 1
Ye, C., Huang, W.-F., Hsu, T.-C., et al. (2026) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2026.04.024
Exploring the Design Qualities of Just-In-Time Visual Feedback in a Basketball Free Throw Scenario
Eska, B., Rosa, L. D., & Karolus, J. (2026) · ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis) · doi:10.1145/3797993.3798019
“These technologies provide the basis for generating and delivering personalized feedback across different modalities, such as visual, auditory, and haptic channels, or through multi-modal combinations [24].”
Masai, K., & Saito, H. (2026) · IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW) · doi:10.1109/vrw70859.2026.00183
“However, vision is ill-suited to conveying fine temporal structure, and visual overlays can increase cognitive load by competing for limited visual attention [14].”
Sun, L., & Guarese, R. (2026) · IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW) · doi:10.1109/vrw70859.2026.00133
Klausing, M. R., Junk, J., & Subialka, J. A. (2026) · Advances in Rehabilitation · doi:10.2478/advrehab-2026-0003
Yoshihara, H., Hirano, T., Liao, C.-C., et al. (2026) · Augmented Humans International Conference (AHs) · doi:10.1145/3795011.3795052
“From the perspective of sports skill acquisition, particularly motor learning, it is crucial to receive feedback while the kinesthetic sensation during movement execution is still vivid [24].”
How Input Methods Augment Feedback in Engineering Drawing Review
Makino, Y., & Manabe, H. (2026) · Augmented Humans International Conference (AHs) · doi:10.1145/3795011.3797372
“Furthermore, studies in educational contexts report that multimodal methods achieve higher performance and subjective ratings [8], potentially reflecting reduced cognitive load through distributed information processing [10].”
Lisik, M., Majda, U., Mida, M., Stołtny, J., Kwiecień, J., Kimla, W., Michalik, M., Maruszak, A., Hajok, N., & Goryczka, J. (2026) · International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science · doi:10.31435/ijitss.1(49).2026.5038
A Soft Robotic Glove Providing Proprioceptive Feedback for Grip Force Regulation Training
Lei, Y., Hashem, R., Villarroel, M., et al. (2026) · IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft) · doi:10.1109/robosoft67810.2026.11522873
Feeling the Flow: A Real‐Time Multimodal Visuo‐Haptic Interface for Interactive Fluid Dynamics in XR
Chen, G. L., & Xiong, M. (2026) · Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds · doi:10.1002/cav.70135
Yang, Y.-M., & Park, J. (2026) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s00221-026-07330-w
Hutterer, K., Pauli, P., Dannlowski, U., Deckert, J., Domschke, K., Lonsdorf, T. B., Lueken, U., Reif, A., Romanos, M., Schiele, M. A., et al. (2026) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2026.105096
Spatial Audio-Based Exercise Support System - Evaluation of Sound Source Localization Accuracy
Kikuchi, I., Higashi, A., Shinagawa, N., et al. (2025) · doi:10.1109/icsm64417.2025.11541556
“Many of these methods share the point that they convey motion evaluation, feedback, and motion instructions primarily via visual information [4].”
You got to coordinate, stably: 3D bimanual guidance with haptic and auditory cues
Suzuki, T., Nakano, K., Narumi, T., & Kuzuoka, H. (2026) · Frontiers in Virtual Reality · doi:10.3389/frvir.2026.1757963
Mizuno, M., Kishino, Y., Shirai, Y., et al. (2026) · Regenerative Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.reth.2026.101151
“Moreover, such real-time visualization has the potential to enhance operator training and procedural standardization, similar to motion analysis and biofeedback systems that are widely utilized in motor learning and rehabilitation research [20,21].”
Supporting Dance Motor Skill Training in Multisensory VR Experience
Choi, S., Lim, J., Lee, N., & Yoo, Y. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3813001
“However, for novice trainees, the criteria by which they evaluate and regulate their own movements during performance are often unclear [59].”
Chiu, M., Queenan, K., Bono, C. M., & Harteveld, C. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3813035
“These combinations were explored in a 2013 review [85], which particularly highlighted increased perception and alertness, improved spatiotemporal awareness, and enhanced motor learning.”
Shin, S.-Y., Yi, H., Choi, D., Lee, Y., Jeong, C. Y., Lee, C. H., & Lee, W. (2026) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3800645.3813055
“Importantly, these cues should be designed not as post-hoc indicators, but as the basis for an embodied feedback loop that supports ongoing adjustment and internalization during performance [64, 70].”
Palotie, U., Liukkonen, M., Lingström, P., Felszeghy, S., Huhtela, O. S., Al‐Haroni, M., Didilescu, A. C., Schick, S., Pasqualini, D., Ahmed, K., et al. (2026) · European Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1055/s-0046-1823144
“41,42 These are all foundational elements of safe and ef fi cient clinical performance.”
Sivamurugan, C., Yashaswini, K., Nihith, J., Kumar, K., Nagarjuna, K. V., & Gowsalya, P. (2026) · International Conference on Sustainable and Futuristic Technologies (ICSFT) · doi:10.1109/icsft67370.2026.11566645
“Instead, gestures or movements produced by the cases are captured and used as inputs to control the gaming system [12–16].”
Beyond error reduction: Dimensional analysis reveals qualitative differences in motor expertise
Park, C. (2026) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2026.104951
Güler, V. Ş., Turan, M. B., Pepe, O., Gülşen, D. B. A., Soyal, M., & Yıldız, M. (2026) · BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/s13102-026-01830-6
Kusafuka, A., Wu, D.-A. J., Kudo, K., Shibata, K., Watanabe, K., & Shinsuke Shimojo, A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10092944/v1
Bridging the divide in motor learning research
Grießbach, E., Hernández-Inostroza, A., Cañal‐Bruland, R., & Haith, A. M. (2026) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-026-02519-z
“…example, contextual interference 13 addresses practice scheduling effects (for example, blocked versus random practice), implicit learning aims to promote stress-resistant performance 78,79 and guidance theory concerns the timing and frequency of augmented feedback and how they affect learning 80 .”
The Potential of Tangible Existence for Technology Inheritance
Hamada, T., Kasamatsu, K., & Ainoya, T. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-29175-2_14
Social participation and epistemic autonomy in extended reality learning
Noller, J. U. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01800-7
“Third, multi-modal feedback —visual, auditory, and haptic—helps learners with differing perceptual strengths to remain oriented and engaged (Sigrist et al. 24).”
Borgehammar, J., Ahmed, F., & Singh, B. (2026) · Clinical Case Reports · doi:10.1002/ccr3.73078
Kim, S.-H., Cuong, V. H., Thao, L. H. N., et al. (2026) · Computers & Education X Reality · doi:10.1016/j.cexr.2026.100175
A structural causal model for robot-assisted upper-limb neurorehabilitation
Balasubramanian, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences · doi:10.3389/fresc.2026.1819379 · Cited by 1
“These distinct components could include different sensory modalities (e.g., visual, auditory, or haptic) (88), feedback schedules (e.g., concurrent, terminal, faded, bandwidth etc.) (86), feedback content (e.g., knowledge of results, knowledge of performance etc.) (86), and social feedback (e.g.,…”
Motor Control of the Baseball-Hitting Technique using Artificial Intelligence Feedback
Suh, D., & Kim, Y.-V. (2026) · Journal of Human Kinetics · doi:10.5114/jhk/221045
“Effective feedback that supports perception-action coupling and exploration within the perceptual-motor workspace varies depending on the goal (Sigrist et al., 2013).”
Sequential reaching in older adults: vibrotactile feedback improves preparation and movement control
Kolahdouz, S. M., Malone, Q., Passmore, S. R., Marotta, J. J., & Glazebrook, C. M. (2026) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2026.1840948
“…previous work suggesting that auditory cues primarily provide information about movement timing, whereas vibrotactile feedback may provide more movement-specific somatosensory information that can support online movement regulation and sequential control (Sigrist et al., 2013; Bark et al., 2014).”
InfluentialSimon, C., Otmane, S., & Chellali, A. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare · doi:10.1145/3831413
“Verbal instructions provide strategic guidance and enhance motivation, self-efficacy, and learners’ engagement [82].”
Restoring Symmetry After Sport-Related Concussion: A Viewpoint on Biofeedback-Guided Rehabilitation
Stavitz, J. (2026) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym18071236
Chitlange, N. M., Hullumani, S., & Pakhan, A. (2026) · doi:10.1109/icitsif69060.2026.11608986
“Lind et al. showed that trunk flexion in sorting tasks using hands was minimized with real-time vibrotactile feedback, which encouraged biomechanical safety [15].”
Olmo-Fajardo, T., Kantan, P. R., Rojo, A., Sanz-Morère, C. B., Spaich, E. G., Dahl, S., & Moreno, J. C. (2026) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0001203 · Cited by 2
“Unlike visual position feedback, musical tempo changes provide limited gradient information [57]: within the target zone, users receive no gradient information about proximity to boundaries, while outside the zone, progressive distortion in tempo and pitch indicates deviation magnitude.”
InfluentialEffects of Visual Feedback-based Eccentric Pulley Training on Static and Dynamic Balance Ability
Kim, D. (2026) · Archives of Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.24332/aospt.2026.22.1.05
Lee, H., & Yang, D. (2026) · Archives of Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy · doi:10.24332/aospt.2026.22.1.01
Kim, J., Kim, K. K., Rhee, T. J., Rhee, T. J., & Jung, M. (2026) · Journal of the Korea Computer Graphics Society · doi:10.15701/kcgs.2026.32.3.23
The Role of Visuo-Haptic Models in Laparoscopic Training: A Comparative Study
Catalano, A. M., Biondi, S., Coduri, M., et al. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-32350-7_30
Walters, S., Walters, L., Hoffman, B. W., et al. (2026) · Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.resp.2026.104635
Mliki, H., Mahfoudh, H. B., & Zoudji, B. (2026) · International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1080/1612197x.2026.2716012
Inspirations of traditional Chinese martial arts Qinggong training for parkour
Zhang, J., Zhan, Y., Wu, L., Liu, T., & Li, Z. (2026) · Frontiers in Sports and Active Living · doi:10.3389/fspor.2026.1855244
“More generally, augmented auditory feedback can support motor learning when it supplies interpretable information about movement outcome or timing (44).”
Roaas, T., & Lorås, H. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1886530
Modifying Task Difficulty with Augmented Sensory Feedback for Motor Training in Virtual Reality
Shi, Y., Dewil, S., & Nataraj, R. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-17790-2_25
Falih, M. N. (2026) · Pubmedia Jurnal Pendidikan Olahraga · doi:10.47134/jpo.v4i1.2868
Wang, S. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2713806
Wang, Z., Li, H., Wang, Q., Gao, Z., & Niu, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Sports and Active Living · doi:10.3389/fspor.2026.1809566
StrikeGuide: Modulating Foot Strikes During Running Using Ambient Auditory Feedback
Eska, B., Körber, J., Gonschior, D. E. E., Woźniak, P. W., & Kosch, T. (2026) · Mensch und Computer (MuC) · doi:10.1145/3820253.3820264
Technical Assessment of Simulated Neonatal Intubation Using Multi-Angle Video
Gu, H., Galindo, R. B., Cranshaw, M., Alade, T., Fuerch, J. H., Yamada, N. K., Hunt, K., Pineda, L., McWilliam, P., Kent, N., et al. (2026) · American Journal of Perinatology · doi:10.1055/a-2938-9439
Shi, Y., Dewil, S., Marvin, Z., et al. (2026) · JMIR XR and spatial computing. · doi:10.2196/94745
“The value of augmented feedback may increase with task demands, as greater path curvature and arc length raise spatial control requirements and reliance on external visual guidance [4].”
Miao, Y., Long, T., Hu, S., & Pan, D. (2026) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste69562.2026.11649838
“Recent studies highlight the critical role of feedback in enhancing motor skill learning in physical education, with visual and corrective feedback shown to significantly improve performance outcomes[10][11].”
Guede-Rojas, F., Bello-Díaz, J., Flores-Leal, K., Oporto-Ruiz, Y., Riquelme-Briones, M., Vera-Angulo, R., Ulloa-Díaz, D., Jerez‐Mayorga, D., & Carvajal-Parodi, C. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2719185
Qin, L., Zhang, Z., & Xu, B. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1919592
Tan, Y., Mou, X., Liu, S., Zang, L., & Cui, H. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1914946
“Motor-learning research shows that augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback can support learning under particular task, timing, complexity, and learner conditions (Sigrist et al., 2013).”
Guan, Y., Xu, J., Liu, Z., Qin, Q., Wang, X., An, C., Wang, G., Zhang, Z., Gong, M., & Bin, Z. (2026) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/91461 · Cited by 1
“…inherent in 2D mirror images; second, quantified deviation-angle data are more precise than subjective perception; and third, multimodal (visual and auditory) feedback may reduce cognitive load and support motor learning, thereby enhancing patients’ ability to correct abnormal postures [75,76].”
Force-sensing glove with real-time visual feedback for cello right-hand technique instruction
Arbizu, D., Yeregui, A., Abárzuza, I. S., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1856906
“…the early stages of learning; in particular, concurrent visual feedback is considered especially beneficial during the acquisition of complex motor skills, although excessive reliance on continuous feedback may hinder the development of intrinsic error-detection mechanisms (Sigrist et al., 2013).”
Zhao, L.-H., Zhang, J., Wu, J., Cao, Y., Lu, Z.-Y., Hua, X., Bi, X., & Xu, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2026.1820579 · Cited by 1
Ma, Q., Lei, X., Li, F., Yang, C., Du, J., Zhu, J., Zhao, D., & Jia, Z. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1925220
“Reporting these properties separately is consistent with knowledge-of-performance feedback, which identifies features of the movement rather than providing only an outcome (19, 20).”
Machine Learning in Movement-Based Interaction for Performing Arts Applications
Bevilacqua, F. P., Françoise, J., Alaoui, S. F., et al. (2026) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108872225.005
Human-Centered Machine Learning in the Arts and Humanities
Fiebrink, R., Gillies, M. F. P., & Ramos, G. (2026) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108872225.002
Echeverría, J., & Santos, O. C. (2026) · Inventions · doi:10.3390/inventions11050094
“Feedback can be visual, auditory, haptic, verbal, kinesthetic, or multimodal, and can be delivered at different times relative to the execution of the movement (i.e., while performing, immediately following, or after the session) [16].”
Cheng, G.-R., & Chiu, W.-Y. (2026) · Frontiers in Sports and Active Living · doi:10.3389/fspor.2026.1938037
“AR-assisted feedback in physical education and motor-skill learning AR-assisted learning has been examined in physical education and movement-based settings (4, 7, 10, 12), with its value shaped by instructional alignment (11, 18).”
Apprentissage, évaluation et rééducation de l’écriture
Véron-Delor, L., Pinto, S., Eusebio, A., et al. (2025) · De Boeck Supérieur eBooks · doi:10.3917/dbu.conna.2025.01.0233
Tornay, S., Battisti, A., Nanchen, A., Holzknecht, F., Tarigopula, N., Méndez, O., Camgöz, N. C., Razavi, M., Tissi, K., Sidler-Miserez, S., et al. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3842664
“The application continues to provide both natural and abstract visual feedback [56, 66].”
Seo, J.-W., Kim, K., Seok, J., Choi, M., & Choi, J. (2026) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/101208
“Larger randomized studies should also investigate whether external visual feedback influences motor performance through attentional-focus or sensory-reweighting mechanisms [14,15,18-20].”
Qi, T. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1929537
“Motor-learning research on augmented feedback makes a parallel argument: performance information supports learning when it guides attention, error detection, and subsequent correction (Salmoni et al., 1984; Sigrist et al., 2013).”
Cheng, X., Gao, X., Liang, W., Meiring, R. M., & Zhang, Y. (2026) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s26185857
“During training, concurrent movement feedback, defined as feedback presented during task execution rather than after completion of the exercise set or session [51], is provided through the avatar using visual and auditory feedback.”
Cross-Modal Matching Is Not Bidirectional: Implications for Human Multisensory Feedback
West, A. M., Kasimcan, B., Pimpalkar, A. S., et al. (2026) · 2022 9th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference for Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob) · doi:10.1109/biorob66782.2026.11681322
“CMM has been widely applied in a range of domains including, perceptual assessment [12], sensory substitution and augmentation [15], motor learning [3], and neurorehabilitation [10], [11].”
Influentialgarcia, R. Q., Zaldívar-Colado, X. P., Zaldívar-Colado, U., et al. (2026) · Developmental Neurorehabilitation · doi:10.1080/17518423.2026.2727398
Cha, K. M., & Jeong, H. (2026) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813261487972
Максимова, Ю. А., Омельянчик-Зюркалова, О., Бистра, І. І., et al. (2026) · Academic Visions · doi:10.66556/2786-586x.54.maksymova-y
Yang, J., Zhang, Z., & Li, Z. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1932711
Li, P., Du, D., Hu, X., et al. (2026) · Sensors and Actuators A Physical · doi:10.1016/j.sna.2026.118548
Wang, Y., & Wu, J. G. (2026) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers15100651
Swędrak, R., Dobrakowska, Z., & Klepacz, J. (2026) · International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science · doi:10.31435/ijitss.3(51).2026.6640
Jones, G., Stone, J. A., Rothwell, M., Otte, F. W., & Davids, K. (2026) · Perceptual and Motor Skills · doi:10.1177/00315125261492454
The Ubiquitous Role of the Smartphone in Breaking: An Ethnographic-Informed Study
da Fonseca, L. P., Nunes, F., & Silva, P. A. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · doi:10.1145/3832020
“Furthermore, although research confirms that real-time augmented visual feedback is more effective than sham feedback for modifying high-risk biomechanics [17, 45], Breakers currently lack access to such real-time biofeedback systems.”
Hayashi, H., Hayashi, T., Ikudome, S., Fukuhara, K., Morishita, Y., Takamido, R., Cañal‐Bruland, R., & Nakamoto, H. (2026) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2026.2741470
Fox, S. R., Jangraw, D. C., Mascia, G., et al. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-74255-3
MIMIC: A Real-Time Multimodal Framework to Provide Fine-Grained Motion Corrections Remotely
Judkins, B., Yentes, J. M., & Rojas-Muñoz, E. (2026) · INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION · doi:10.1145/3776574.3831237
“This may indicate that stimulation cues provided more efficient or concise guidance once corrections were delivered [68].”
Variable task difficulty with augmented sensory feedback for motor training in virtual reality
Shi, Y., Dewil, S., Marvin, Z., Harel, N. Y., & Nataraj, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2026.1884697
Corredera, J. M., Maggio, F. D., Tanaka, A., et al. (2026) · Biosystems & biorobotics · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-18746-8_49
MyWorkout: A Motion-Aware Learning System for Integrating Psychomotor Skills Into Online Education
Zarza, M., Portaz, M., & Santos, O. C. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-37982-5_55
A Quantitative Framework for MR Juggling Training
Bondarenko, V., Rosenkranz, R., Kührt, C., et al. (2026) · International Conference on Emerging Techniques in Computational Intelligence (ICETCI) · doi:10.1109/icetci71772.2026.11710570
“In MR, users can practice complex motor tasks under controlled, repeatable conditions, which makes the medium particularly suitable for controlled practice and measurable performance shaping [1], [2].”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Sigrist, R., Rauter, G., Riener, R., & Wolf, P.
- Affiliations
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Sigrist, Roland
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2012-11-07
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-53
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W2058543238
- Semantic Scholar
- 13efed1501fea7fee3293c3f0e2a184e18b3ff69
- Cited by
- 1,416
- References
- 337
- Citations by year
- 2026: 173 · 2025: 135 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 120 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 114 · 2019: 125 · 2018: 114 · 2017: 89 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 25
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- reroDoc Digital Library (submittedVersion)
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Keywords
- augmented feedback, motor learning, visual feedback, auditory feedback, haptic feedback, multimodal feedback, motor learning theory
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Humans, Learning, Motor Skills, Photic Stimulation, Feedback, Psychological, Feedback, Sensory
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
