ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2018
From anticipation to integration: the role of integrated action-effects in building sensorimotor contingencies.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Guiding gaze via gaze: Effect anticipation during intentional saccadic gaze leading.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Anticipating the magnitude of response outcomes can induce a potentiation effect for manipulable objects.Psychological research · 2022Review
- Enactive Memory.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- When the vibrations allow for anticipating the force to be produced: an extend to Pfister et al. (2014).Experimental brain research · 2018Article
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
Ideomotor approaches to action control have provided evidence that the activation of an anticipatory image of previously learned action-effects plays a decisive role in action selection. This study sought for converging evidence by combining three previous experimental paradigms: the response-effect compatibility protocol introduced by Kunde (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(2), 387-394, 2001), the acquisition-test paradigm developed by Elsner and Hommel (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(1), 229, 2001), and the object-action compatibility manipulation of Tucker and Ellis (Visual Cognition, 8(6), 769-800, 2001). Three groups of participants first performed a response-effect compatibility task, in which they carried out power and precision grasps that produced either grasp-compatible or grasp-incompatible pictures, or no action effects. Performance was better in the compatible than in the incompatible group, which replicates previous observations and extends them to relationships between grasps and objects. Then, participants were to categorize object pictures by carrying out grasp responses. Apart from replicating previous findings of better performance in trials in which object size and grasp type was compatible, we found that this stimulus-response compatibility effect depended on previous response-effect learning. Taken together, these findings support the assumption that the experience of action-effect contingencies establishes durable event files that integrate representations of actions and their effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28537007What 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.