ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2018
Concurrent Cortical Representations of Function- and Size-Related Object Affordances: An fMRI Study.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social Decision Preferences for Close Others Are Embedded in Neural and Linguistic Representations.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Body size as a metric for the affordable world.eLife · 2024Article
- Sustainable materials: a linking bridge between material perception, affordance, and aesthetics.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- The roles of motion, gesture, and embodied action in the processing of mathematical concepts.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Hazardous tools: the emergence of reasoning in human tool use.Psychological research · 2021Article
- Editorial: Behavioral and Neural Bases of Object Affordance Processing and Its Clinical Implications.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Sound-Action Symbolism.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Review
- On the Temporal Dynamics of Tool Use.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous work has shown that the perception of a graspable object may automatically potentiate actions that are tailored to specific action-related features of the object (e.g., its size) and may be related to its immediate grasping as well as to its long-term, functional use. We investigated the neural correlates of function- and size-related object affordances that may be concurrently potentiated by a graspable object. Participants were lying in a MR scanner holding a large switch in one hand and a small switch in the other hand. They passively attended a large or a small object with clearly separated functional and graspable end that was displayed centrally at an average angle of 45 degrees. Participants responded to the direction of an arrow that was overlaid on the object after a mean period of 1,000 ms after object onset and was pointing to the left or to the right with equal probability. Response times were shorter when the arrow pointed to the functional end of the object and when the responses were made with the switch that was congruent to the size of the perceived object. A clear distinction was found in the representation of function- and size-related affordances; the former was represented in the posterior parietal cortex and the latter in prefrontal, premotor, and primary sensorimotor cortices. We conclude that different aspects of object-directed actions may be automatically potentiated by individual object features and are represented in distinct brain areas.
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.