ReviewIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2010
Biological roots of foresight and mental time travel.
Review in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quo Vadis, Cultural Psychology? Time to Become Psychology. Again.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2025Article
- If Gordon Allport was right, the Likert-type personality scales must be very poor descriptors of personality: he was right.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Beyond the Institutionalized Fetish of the "Neurosciences": Taking Brain Seriously.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2017Article
- What are Higher Psychological Functions?Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2016Review
- Travel into a fairy land: a critique of modern qualitative and mixed methods psychologies.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2011Article
- Quantitative methods in psychology: inevitable and useless.Frontiers in psychology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies of future-oriented capacities today are based on Cartesian epistemology. In this paper it is suggested that, following this epistemology, not only the answers to scientific questions, but even the questions themselves should be replaced. Particularly, instead of asking whether some form of future-oriented cognition might be unique to humans, and what are the "causes" of such capacities; it might be more productive to ask, in the framework of the structural-systemic epistemology, what level of analysis corresponds to future-oriented capacities, and in what form their structure is organized. The structural-systemic theory of functional systems by the Russian physiologist Piotr Anokhin is described, where it is shown that future orientation is the central characteristic of living systems. Furthermore, it is an essential property of all life-forms as wholes. Therefore understanding of future-oriented capacities requires description of what Anokhin called functional systems, systems that can be found in all life forms. Starting from Anokhin's structural-systemic epistemology, it is possible to go further and build a developmental theory of different kinds of future-orientation. It is proposed that future-orientation as a characteristic of life has evolved into psychical future-oriented cognition. From there, in turn, qualitatively novel forms of semiotically mediated future-oriented processes have emerged. Building a theory of future-oriented capacities in this direction seems to be scientifically more productive than continuing the theory-building following the fundamentally limited Cartesian epistemology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20333486What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.