Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07531212

Movement-Sequence Observation in Healthy Adults: Motor and Cognitive Effects on Effector-Independent Performance

Studies examining the effects of action observation (AO) on ipsilateral versus contralateral upper limb (UL) motor performance have reported mixed findings. Furthermore, the extent to which the cognitive component of sequence observation contributes to AO-related improvements in motor sequence execution remains unclear. The investigators aimed to determine whether observing unilateral UL reaching movement (RM) sequences affects UL RM performance in an effector-dependent or effector-independent manner in healthy adults and to determine the contribution of the cognitive aspect, particularly sequence memory, to the motor performance. Sixty participants randomly participated in a single-session intervention of (1) observing RM sequences with the non-dominant left UL (AO group); or (2) observing identical light switches sequences (SO group); or (3) observing nature films (Nature Observation (NO) group). Sequential RMs of both the left and right ULs (ipsilateral and contralateral to the observed movements, respectively) toward the light switches were tested before and immediately after the intervention, and retested after 24 h.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Healthy

Age range

18 year–35 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Brain and Motor Behavior Laboratory based at Ariel University, Israel

Ariel, 40700, Israel

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

right-hand dominance and self-reported as healthy

Exclusion criteria

having musculoskeletal or neurological deficits interfering with task performance (proper UL and LL reaching performance)

Treatment and study plan

Action Observation (AO)

Behavioral

Participants observed reaching movement sequence performed by the left upper limb toward light switches (10 blocks of video clips, each containing 5 sequences (totaling 300 reaching movements), with a 10 second rest period between blocks).

Sequence observation (SO)

Behavioral

Participants observed a video clip of switches illuminating in the same sequence, from the same egocentric perspective, but without any human movements. The illuminating switches were activated with the same timing and rest periods as those in the AO group

Nature Observation (NO)

Behavioral

Participants observed a neutral movie that consisted of nature views without any human or animal movements. These videos included 10-second blank screen intervals corresponding to the rest periods in the AO and SO video clips

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in response time (s) from baseline to post-test

    Time frame: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session

    Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed

  2. Change in response time (s) from post-test to follow up

    Time frame: post-test - immediately after the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session

    Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed

  3. Change in response time (s) from baseline to follow up

    Time frame: baseline - before the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session

    Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in failure (%) from baseline to post-test

    Time frame: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session

    Percentage of the reaching movements in which the participant failed to reach the switch in the allotted time (1 sec) or pressed the wrong buzzer

  2. Change in failure (%) from post-test to follow up

    Time frame: post-test - immediately after the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session

    Percentage of the reaching movements in which the participant failed to reach the switch in the allotted time (1 sec) or pressed the wrong buzzer.

  3. Change in failure (%) from base line to follow up

    Time frame: baseline - before the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session

    Percentage of the reaching movements in which the participant failed to reach the switch in the allotted time (1 sec) or pressed the wrong buzzer.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Ariel University

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2026
First posted
Apr 15, 2026
Registry last updated
Apr 23, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.