HealthyNCT07531212
Movement-Sequence Observation in Healthy Adults: Motor and Cognitive Effects on Effector-Independent Performance
A study testing Action observation (AO), Sequence observation (SO) and Nature Observation (NO) in people with Healthy, run by Ariel University at 1 site in Israel.
Trial summary
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… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 35 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Action observation (AO), Sequence observation (SO) and Nature Observation (NO)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIsrael
- Study dates
- 9 Mar 2024to 1 Mar 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 35 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- right-hand dominance and self-reported as healthy
Who cannot join
- having musculoskeletal or neurological deficits interfering with task performance (proper UL and LL reaching performance)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Israel1 site
Brain and Motor Behavior Laboratory based at Ariel University, Israel
Ariel, 40700
About this study
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.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Action observation (AO), Sequence observation (SO), Nature Observation (NO)
- Keywords
- Action observation, Motor performance, Cognition, Contralateral transfer
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Action observation (AO)Behavioural
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)Behavioural
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)Behavioural
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
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Action Observation (AO) | Experimental | Observing a video recording of a model performing the task Receives: Behavioral: Action observation (AO) |
| Sequence Observation (SO) | Active comparator | Observing a video of the sequence being illuminated on the device without observing any human movements Receives: Behavioral: Sequence observation (SO) |
| Neutral Observation (NO) | Sham comparator | Observing a neutral video of nature veiws without any human movement Receives: Behavioral: Nature Observation (NO) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in response time (s) from baseline to post-test
Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed
Measured: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session
Change in response time (s) from post-test to follow up
Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed
Measured: post-test - immediately after the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session
Change in response time (s) from baseline to follow up
Average time of movements, measured from the time the switch lights up until it is pressed
Measured: baseline - before the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in failure (%) from baseline to post-test
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
Measured: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session
Change in failure (%) from post-test to follow up
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.
Measured: post-test - immediately after the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session
Change in failure (%) from base line to follow up
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.
Measured: baseline - before the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Apr 2026
- Study start9 Mar 2024
- Primary completion26 Jul 2024
- Study completion1 Mar 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ariel University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07531212
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AU-HEA-SFT-20230511
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 9 Apr 2026
- Last updated
- 23 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The datasets (Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Informed Consent Form, Analytic Code generated during and/or analyzed during the current study) will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Movement-Sequence Observation in Healthy Adults: Motor and Cognitive Effects on Effector-Independent Performance
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07531212
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AU-HEA-SFT-20230511
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- Action observation, Motor performance, Cognition, Contralateral transfer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ariel UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 9 Mar 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 26 Jul 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Mar 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Action Observation (AO) | Experimental | Behavioral: Action observation (AO)Observing a video recording of a model performing the task |
| Sequence Observation (SO) | Active comparator | Behavioral: Sequence observation (SO)Observing a video of the sequence being illuminated on the device without observing any human movements |
| Neutral Observation (NO) | Sham comparator | Behavioral: Nature Observation (NO)Observing a neutral video of nature veiws without any human movement |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 35 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- right-hand dominance and self-reported as healthy
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- having musculoskeletal or neurological deficits interfering with task performance (proper UL and LL reaching performance)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Action observation (AO)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). | Behavioural | Action Observation (AO) |
| Sequence observation (SO)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 | Behavioural | Sequence Observation (SO) |
| Nature Observation (NO)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 | Behavioural | Neutral Observation (NO) |
Primary outcome
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
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
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
3 secondary outcomes
Change in failure (%) from baseline to post-test
Time frame: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session
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
Change in failure (%) from base line to follow up
Time frame: baseline - before the training session, follow up - 24 hours after the training session
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Apr 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The datasets (Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Informed Consent Form, Analytic Code generated during and/or analyzed during the current study) will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Action observation (AO), Sequence observation (SO) and Nature Observation (NO) in people with Healthy, run by Ariel University at 1 site in Israel.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Israel. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in response time (s) from baseline to post-test (time frame: baseline - before the training session, post-test - immediately after the training session). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Apr 2026.