ArticleJournal of advanced research2021
Static internal representation of dynamic situations reveals time compaction in human cognition.
Article in Journal of advanced research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Memorizing the future: Encoding anticipated interactions enhances human memory for dynamic stimuli.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Spatial prediction of dynamic interactions in rats.PloS one · 2025Article
- Toward Reflective Spiking Neural Networks Exploiting Memristive Devices.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Review
- Spatial Memory in a Spiking Neural Network with Robot Embodiment.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Semantic Knowledge Representation for Strategic Interactions in Dynamic Situations.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe human brain has evolved under the constraint of survival in complex dynamic situations. It makes fast and reliable decisions based on internal representations of the environment. Whereas neural mechanisms involved in the internal representation of space are becoming known, entire spatiotemporal cognition remains a challenge. Growing experimental evidence suggests that brain mechanisms devoted to spatial cognition may also participate in spatiotemporal information processing.
objectivesThe time compaction hypothesis postulates that the brain represents both static and dynamic situations as purely static maps. Such an internal reduction of the external complexity allows humans to process time-changing situations in real-time efficiently. According to time compaction, there may be a deep inner similarity between the representation of conventional static and dynamic visual stimuli. Here, we test the hypothesis and report the first experimental evidence of time compaction in humans.
methodsWe engaged human subjects in a discrimination-learning task consisting in the classification of static and dynamic visual stimuli. When there was a hidden correspondence between static and dynamic stimuli due to time compaction, the learning performance was expected to be modulated. We studied such a modulation experimentally and by a computational model.
resultsThe collected data validated the predicted learning modulation and confirmed that time compaction is a salient cognitive strategy adopted by the human brain to process time-changing situations. Mathematical modelling supported the finding. We also revealed that men are more prone to exploit time compaction in accordance with the context of the hypothesis as a cognitive basis for survival.
conclusionsThe static internal representation of dynamic situations is a human cognitive mechanism involved in decision-making and strategy planning to cope with time-changing environments. The finding opens a new venue to understand how humans efficiently interact with our dynamic world and thrive in nature.
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.