ArticlePeerJ2020
Temporal features of individual and collective self-referential processing: an event-related potential study.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visual and Interoceptive EEG Signatures Reveal the Interaction Between Facial and Creator Identities in Self-Processing.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Neural time course of processing socially meaningful symbolic cues: ERP differences between national-symbol and neutral-object icons.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- The aging self: how older men and women reflect on themselves and others.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividual and collective self are two fundamental self-representations and are important to human experience. The present study aimed to investigate whether individual and collective self have essential difference in neural mechanism.
methodsEvent-related potentials were recorded to explore the electrophysiological correlates of individual and collective self in a self-referential task in which participants were asked to evaluate whether trait adjectives were suitable to describe themselves (individual self-referential processing), a famous person (individual non-self-referential processing), Chinese (collective self-referential processing) or American (collective non-self-referential processing).
resultsAt the early stages, results showed that larger P2 and smaller N2 amplitudes were elicited by individual self-referential than by individual non-self-referential processing whereas no significant differences were observed between collective self-referential and collective non-self-referential processing at these stages. In addition, at the late P3 stage (350-600 ms), larger P3 amplitudes were also elicited by individual self-referential than by individual non-self-referential processing during 350-600 ms interval. However, the collective self-reference effect, indicated by the differences between collective self-referential and collective non-self-referential processing, did not appear until 450 ms and extended to 600 ms. Moreover, individual self-reference effect was more pronounced than collective self-reference effect in the 350-500 ms interval, whereas individual and collective self-reference effect had no significant difference in the 500-600 ms interval. These findings indicated that the time courses of neural activities were different in processing individual and collective self.
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.