ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Differences in Intersubject Early Readiness Potentials Between Voluntary and Instructed Actions.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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.
- Factors that influence the amplitude of the bereitschaftspotential.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2026Review
- Whole-Head Noninvasive Brain Signal Measurement System with High Temporal and Spatial Resolution Using Static Magnetic Field Bias to the Brain.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Time-estimation process could cause the disappearence of readiness potential.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Readiness potential (RP) is a slow negative electroencephalogram (EEG) potential prior to voluntary action and was first described by Kornhuber and Deecke (1965). Recent studies have demonstrated that a few subjects do not exhibit standard RP before voluntary action. In our previous study, we also found that some subjects did not show an early RP preceding instructed action. Although this phenomenon may be meaningful, no studies have yet investigated its origins. In the present study, we designed and implemented an experimental paradigm involving voluntary and instructed actions in the form of hand movements from 29 subjects with concurrent acquisition of EEGs. According to whether the subjects showed a standard RP waveform during instructed action, they were divided into the SHOW and NOSHOW group. Then, the RPs and voltage topographies were plotted for each group. Finally, the slope of each epoch at the early RP phase was estimated. We showed that early RPs were absent in 14 of 29 subjects during instructed actions. Besides, based on the slow cortical potential (SCP) sampling hypothesis, we also showed a decreased proportion in the negative potential for the NOSHOW group. Our results suggested that early RP is absent among approximately half of subjects during instructed action and that the decreased proportion of negative potential shifts may account for the absence of early RP in the NOSHOW group.
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.