Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32292104›Full record

ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2020

It's not always about me: The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self-other prioritisation.

Johanna K Falbén, Marius Golubickis, Darja Wischerath, Dimitra Tsamadi, Linn M Persson, Siobhan Caughey, Saga L Svensson, C Neil Macrae

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Temporal Properties of Self-Prioritization.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  8. Self-Prioritization Reconsidered: Scrutinizing Three Claims.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2023
    Article
  9. The Functional Self.Experimental psychology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors.

Johanna K FalbénSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4711-1771
Marius GolubickisSchool of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Darja WischerathSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Dimitra TsamadiSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Linn M PerssonSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Siobhan CaugheySchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Saga L SvenssonSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
C Neil MacraeSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although self-relevance is widely acknowledged to enhance stimulus processing, the exclusivity of this effect remains open to question. In particular, in commonly adopted experimental paradigms, the prioritisation of self-relevant (vs. other-relevant) material may reflect the operation of a task-specific strategy rather than an obligatory facet of social-cognitive functioning. By changing basic aspects of the decisional context, it may therefore be possible to generate stimulus-prioritisation effects for targets other than the self. Based on the demonstration that ownership facilitates object categorisation (i.e., self-ownership effect), here we showed that stimulus prioritisation is sensitive to prior expectations about the prevalence of forthcoming objects (owned-by-self vs. owned-by-friend) and whether these beliefs are supported during the task. Under conditions of stimulus uncertainty (i.e., no prior beliefs), replicating previous research, objects were classified more rapidly when owned-by-self compared with owned-by-friend (Experiment 1). When, however, the frequency of stimulus presentation either confirmed (Experiment 2) or disconfirmed (Experiment 3) prior expectations, stimulus prioritisation was observed for the most prevalent objects regardless of their owner. A hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM) analysis further revealed that decisional bias was underpinned by differences in the evidential requirements of response generation. These findings underscore the flexibility of ownership effects (i.e., stimulus prioritisation) during object processing.

Indexed as

EgocentrismOwnershipDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeUncertaintyYoung Adultdecision-makingownershipprior beliefsresponse biasSelf-prioritisationstimulus prevalence

Identifiers

PMID32292104
PMCPMC7604934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.