Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Crossed arms produce a large crossing effect size of 1.45 in tactile temporal order judgment tasksCrossed Arms Impact How People Judge Timing and Order

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that tactile TOJ tasks show a large crossing effect size of 1.45, supporting their use in clinical research.

This meta-analysis synthesized data from 39 experiments across 29 publications to evaluate the crossing effect in tactile temporal order judgment (TOJ) tasks. The primary outcome was the magnitude of the crossing effect, which was approximately 1.45 in raw form. When corrected for small-study effects using Rucker's method, the effect size was 0.97, and when corrected via p-curve analysis, it was 1.4.

Analysis of moderators including analysis method and response mode showed statistically significant results. However, the authors noted a lack of statistical power to determine significance for many other moderators and specific contrasts. These limitations suggest that while the primary effect is large, specific nuances may be difficult to isolate with current data.

Clinical and research application of the TOJ task is supported by the large observed effect size. This makes it a potentially useful tool in developmental and clinical research areas. However, because many moderators did not reach statistical significance due to low power rather than lack of effect, clinicians and researchers should exercise caution when applying the task to specific questions beyond the general crossing effect.

Researchers looked at how crossing your arms affects a specific task called tactile temporal order judgment. This involves people feeling two different touches and deciding which one happened first. The study analyzed 39 experiments to see if crossing arms changed the results.

The data showed a large effect when people crossed their arms during these tests. Even after adjusting for potential errors in smaller studies, the result remained significant. However, researchers noted that many specific factors, like how fast a person responded or what visual information was available, did not show clear differences.

Because this is a meta-analysis of existing experiments, it provides a broad look at current data rather than a new clinical trial. While the large effect size suggests this task is useful for studying brain function, researchers warn that the results should be used carefully in different medical or developmental settings.

What this means for you:
Crossing arms significantly impacts how people perceive the timing of touch, though specific factors vary.

Common questions

What is a tactile temporal order judgment task?

This is a test where people feel two different touches and must decide which one happened first. It helps researchers understand how the brain processes timing. The study found that crossing your arms during this specific task creates a large effect on how people perceive those sensations.

Does speed of response change the results?

The study looked at whether requiring faster responses changed the outcome. However, because the researchers had limited statistical power for certain comparisons, they could not determine if speed or other specific factors significantly changed the crossing effect.

Is this finding useful for clinical settings?

The large effect size suggests that this task is a useful tool for research in developmental and clinical fields. However, experts suggest caution when using it to answer questions beyond the specific way crossing arms affects timing perception.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedAug 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
The tactile temporal order judgment (TOJ) task is widely used in multisensory neuroscience. Participants judge which of two tactile stimuli, one on each hand, came first. A key finding is that TOJ performance declines when the arms are crossed, likely due to interactions among tactile, proprioceptive, and visual information. The TOJ crossing effect has been widely reported. However, studies have used different analysis methods, leaving open the question of whether the choice of method influences the magnitude of the effect. Some studies have also reported that the crossing effect is modulated by moderators such as the availability of visual information, response modality, or speeded-response requirements. Through a systematic, exhaustive literature search, we identified 85 experiments in 51 publications that investigated the TOJ crossing effect, of which 39 experiments from 29 publications reported sufficient information for inclusion in a meta-analysis and aligned with the focus of our study. This analysis estimated the crossing effect’s size at approximately 1.45. Checks for potential publication bias indicated that this estimate may be inflated, with a corrected estimate of 0.97 using a regression-based adjustment for small-study effects (Rücker’s method) and 1.4 based on p-curve analysis of the reported p-values. Although analysis method and response mode were identified as significant moderators, most moderators and specific contrasts were not statistically significant, likely because too few studies were available to achieve adequate statistical power. The large effect size supports the TOJ task’s use in other research areas, e.g., developmental and clinical. However, the lack of significant moderation suggests caution when applying the task to questions beyond the crossing effect itself.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.