ArticleCognitive processing2020
Tool-number interaction during a prospective memory task.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of short-term hand immobilization on anticipatory mechanism for tool use.Psychological research · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Theoretical views suggest that tool use and numerical magnitude processing can interact during prospective actions. For example, if a person intends to make a meal for several persons the next week, she/he will have to keep in mind during the homework-week large dish and large food portions for this event. Here, the magnitude 'large' can influence the future choice for large dishes and other related large tools. This study presents the first empirical evidence supporting this hypothesis. During a prospective memory task that implied to keep in mind a future action, participants were required to use a tool after processing Arabic numbers. Small (less than 5) and large (more than 5) magnitudes were employed as cues for the initiation of the tool-use task, which required participants to use inverse pliers with a small or a large object, but only for some prospective trials. The inverse pliers were used to dissociate the hand action from the tool action with the object (for example, opening the hand produced the closing action of the tool). The results revealed that during prospective trials, number processing interacted only with the tool action toward the object and not with the hand action. Specifically, after the processing of large magnitudes, the initiation of the closing action of the tool (i.e. the opening action of the hand) was reduced. This finding is discussed in the light of theories on the emergence of semantics through tool actions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32601997What 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.