Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26352170›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science

Rethinking actions: implementation and association.

Lorna C Quandt, Anjan Chatterjee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Neural bases of action abstraction.Biological psychology · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Thematic knowledge, artifact concepts, and the left posterior temporal lobe: Where action and object semantics converge.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2016
    Article
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.

Lorna C QuandtDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Anjan ChatterjeeDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Figurative Language in Aphasic and Health ParticipantsR01DC012511 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CHATTERJEE, ANJAN K · 2013 to 2017
$1.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012511
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Action processing allows us to move through and interact with the world, as well as understand the movements performed by other people. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the semantics of actions as differentiated from the semantics of objects. However, as the understanding of action semantics has evolved, it is evident that the existing literature conflates two senses of the word 'action'-one that stems from studies of tool use and the other from event representation. In this paper, we suggest that this issue can be clarified by closely examining differences in how the human parietal and temporal cortices of the brain process action-related stimuli. By contrasting the posterior parietal cortex to the posterolateral temporal cortex, we characterize two complementary action systems in the human brain, each with its own specialization of function. We suggest that these two systems be referred to as the parietal Action Implementation System, and the posterolateral temporal Action Association System. While the frontoparietal system is concerned primarily with how we perform actions, and simulate others' actions, the temporal action system is more involved with processing actions from a third-person, conceptual standpoint. Recent work in cognitive neuroscience of perception and language, as well as the neuroanatomical organization of these brain regions support this distinction. We will discuss the implications of this work for cognition-, language-, and neuroscience-based action research.

Indexed as

ComprehensionHumansMotion PerceptionPattern Recognition, PhysiologicalPsychophysiologySomatosensory CortexTemporal Lobe

Identifiers

PMID26352170
PMCPMC4600459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.