Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41865360›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2026

Response to "Comments on 'The equilibrium point hypothesis revisited: why threshold control does not explain human movement"'.

Madhur Mangalam, Nick Stergiou

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Madhur MangalamDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, 68182, USA. mmangalam@unomaha.edu.
Nick StergiouDepartment of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, 68182, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We thank Dr. Piscitelli for his thoughtful letter (Piscitelli in Exp Brain Res, 2026) and the opportunity for scholarly dialogue on fundamental questions in motor control. His commentary raises important epistemological considerations regarding theory displacement and the evidential status of referent control theory. We address these points systematically, clarifying both the standards we applied and the empirical foundations of our critique.

Indexed as

Motor ActivityHumansMovementComputational homunculusMotor controlMuscle mechanicsNeuromechanicsNeuroscienceTheoretical critique

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.