ArticlePsicothema2021
Naïve Definitions of Action and Inaction: A Study of Free Associations Using Natural Language Processing and Top-Down Coding.
Article in Psicothema, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEven though the terms "action" and "inaction" have been used to describe objects of attitudes, behaviors, and goals, the meaning of action and inaction for lay people has not been investigated.
methodIn Study 1, participants were asked to spontaneously generate words and behaviors associated with action or inaction. In Studies 2 and 3, participants were presented with behaviors and asked to report whether each behavior involved agency, effort, and change.
resultsNatural language processing of the responses from Study 1 revealed lay conceptualizations included topics related to occurrence, agency, effort, and change. In Studies 2 and 3, simple regressions showed agency, effort, and change correlated with judgments of action and inaction. However, once these predictors were simultaneously entered into a multiple regression, effort captured most of the variance.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that, even though agency and change are important to the definition of action and inaction, effort is paramount.
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.