Human trainees show no clear asymmetric transfer of motion scaling ratio, and scaling ratio effects are small relative to complexity effects¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Transfer performance did not show a strong directional dependence on the trained motion scaling ratio, and the observed ratio effect was small. → Yinqi Huang 2026

Evidence¶

Yinqi Huang 2026¶

Yinqi Huang, Yilin Cai, Mengyao Li, Yue Chen & Robert C. Wilson. (2026). Human learning dynamics during teleoperation of surgical robots. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00442-6

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Human retention/transfer LME analysis across training ratios 1:0.2 and 1:0.6 tested at 1:0.4; the article reports "the observed effect of motion scaling ratio was small" and no clear asymmetric transfer pattern. No effect size for the ratio effect is printed.

"In contrast, the observed effect of motion scaling ratio was small, and we did not observe a clear asymmetric transfer pattern in humans. Thus, the human results do not support Hypothesis 3 as ori- ginally stated."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In LQG transfer simulations, complexity affects all metrics while scaling-ratio effects appear only in efficiency metrics, with a rotational-path-length Complexity × Ratio interaction — related
• Rail complexity affects retention and transfer in opposite directions: retention gains increase with complexity while transfer gains decrease, with no inverted-U — related