Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32643109›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020

Are freely chosen actions generated by stimulus codes or effect codes?

Markus Janczyk, Christoph Naefgen, Wilfried Kunde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Learning and transfer of response-effect relations.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Markus JanczykDepartment of Psychology, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany. janczyk@uni-bremen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9958-3220
Christoph NaefgenFaculty of Psychology, FernUniversität Hagen, Hagen, Germany.
Wilfried KundeDepartment of Psychology III, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft JA2307/1-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A long-standing debate revolves around which mental codes allow humans to control behavior. The internal stimulus model (going back to Rudolf Hermann Lotze) proposes that behavior is controlled by codes of stimuli that had previously preceded corresponding motor activities. The internal effect model (going back to Emil Harleß) proposes that behavior is controlled by codes of perceptual effects that had previously resulted from corresponding motor activities. Here, we present a test of these two control models. We observed evidence for both models with stronger evidence for the internal stimulus model. We suggest that the proposed experimental setup might be a useful tool to study the relative strengths of stimulus control and effect control of behavior in various contexts.

Indexed as

BehaviorPsychomotor PerformanceHumansReaction TimeAction controlAction effectsForced choiceFree choiceIntention

Identifiers

PMID32643109
PMCPMC7536160

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.