ArticleExperimental brain research2020
Congruency of intervening events and self-induced action influence prediction of final results.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predicting self-induced stimuli is easier than predicting externally produced ones and the amplitude of event-related brain potentials (ERP) elicited by self-induced stimuli is smaller than that elicited by externally produced ones. Previous studies reported that these phenomena occurred strong when stimuli were presented immediately after self-induced action. To be able to adapt to changes, however, it is necessary to predict not only an event that follows a self-induced action but also a subsequent final result. We investigated whether congruency among self-induced actions, intervening events, and final results influences the processing of final results. The congruency of an intervening event with self-induced action was task-irrelevant information for the required response to a final result. The results showed that the P1 amplitude elicited by the final result (i.e., somatosensory stimulus) when an intervening event was congruent with self-induced action was smaller than other elicited amplitudes. This suggests that the congruency of an intervening event and self-induced action may facilitate prediction of a final result, even when this congruency is irrelevant to the ongoing task.
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.