ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016
The Temporal Dynamics of Perceiving Other's Painful Actions.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scarcity mindset reduces empathic responses to others' pain: the behavioral and neural evidence.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2023Article
- Neural responses to facial attractiveness in the judgments of moral goodness and moral beauty.Brain structure & function · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study investigates the temporal dynamics of the brain activity predicting the sensory outcomes of observed hand-object interactions of others. Participants are presented with pictures of a hand grasping or withdrawing from noxious and neutral objects. They are then asked to judge whether this hand-object interaction causes painful consequences. In the early stages of stimulus processing, the effect of action was observed in the event-related potential components N1 and N2. Significant interactions of action × object were observed in the later components P3 and late positive potential (LPP): only when the object was noxious, the action "grasp" elicited a significantly larger amplitude than the action "withdrawal". These results suggest that: on the one hand, when observing the hand-object interaction from the third-person perspective, the action type of others can be processed in an automatic style. On the other hand, integrating the information of action and object to predict the sensory consequence of this interaction is a top-down, cognitive controlled processing. The current findings are different from previous studies using first-person perspective visual stimuli which support that the processing of hand-object interaction is rapid and automatic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.