Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30061461›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2018

The methodological puzzle of phenomenal consciousness.

Ian Phillips

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The exclusionary approach to consciousness.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2023
    Review
  7. The search for invertebrate consciousness.Nous (Detroit, Mich.) · 2022
    Article
  8. The hatching of consciousness.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Distinguishing the Neural Correlates of Perceptual Awareness and Postperceptual Processing.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Measures of agency.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Dream experiences and the neural correlates of perceptual consciousness and cognitive access.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Review
  15. Perceptual consciousness and cognitive access: an introduction.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Article
  16. 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

1 author.

Ian PhillipsDepartment of Philosophy, Birmingham University, Birmingham, West Midlands, UK ianbphillips@princeton.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2932-8045

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Is phenomenal consciousness constitutively related to cognitive access? Despite being a fundamental issue for any science of consciousness, its empirical study faces a severe methodological puzzle. Recent years have seen numerous attempts to address this puzzle, either in practice, by offering evidence for a positive or negative answer, or in principle, by proposing a framework for eventual resolution. The present paper critically considers these endeavours, including partial-report, metacognitive and no-report paradigms, as well as the theoretical proposal that we can make progress by studying phenomenal consciousness as a natural kind. It is argued that the methodological puzzle remains obdurately with us and that, for now, we must adopt an attitude of humility towards the phenomenal.This article is part of the theme issue 'Perceptual consciousness and cognitive access'.

Indexed as

AwarenessConsciousnessMetacognitionHumansModels, Psychologicalcognitive accessmethodological puzzleno-report paradigmspartial-report paradigmsphenomenal consciousnessphenomenal overflow

Identifiers

PMID30061461
PMCPMC6074091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.