ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2021
Two views on the cognitive brain.
Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 92 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
92 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sensory recruitment in visual short-term memory: A systematic review and meta-analysis of sensory visual cortex interference using transcranial magnetic stimulation.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Pooled it
- Review
- Behavioral demands organize a decision process into distinct yet coordinated neural representations in parietal cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Dynamical Cognitive Science! Wherefore Art Thou?Topics in cognitive science · 2026Article
- The Dynamicist Landscape.Topics in cognitive science · 2026Article
- Aperiodic Dynamics of Cell Assemblies Recruited for L1 and L2 Processing of FrenchBrain sciences · 2026Article
- How to Foster Challenging Interdisciplinary Collaborations: Can Philosophy Support Neuroscientists?The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Review
- Clarifying the conceptual dimensions of representation in neuroscience.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026Review
- Task-induced topological and geometrical changes in whole-brain dynamics predict cognitive individual differences.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Reductionism in Engram Neuroscience.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Review
- Exploring neural manifolds across a wide range of intrinsic dimensions.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Bodily maps of subject-specific feelings and academic emotions among high school students.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Cognitive training shapes brain plasticity and schematic representations.Behavioral and brain functions : BBF · 2025Review
- Article
- A line attractor maintains aggressiveness during feeding in "hangry" mice.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- In silico discovery of representational relationships across visual cortex.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Similarity in Early Life Stress Exposure Is Associated With Similarity in Neural Representations in Early Adulthood.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Multistable bimodal perceptual coding within the ventral premotor cortex.Science advances · 2025Article
- Article
- The overlapping genetic architecture of psychiatric disorders and cortical brain structure.Nature. Mental health · 2025Article
32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognition can be defined as computation over meaningful representations in the brain to produce adaptive behaviour. There are two views on the relationship between cognition and the brain that are largely implicit in the literature. The Sherringtonian view seeks to explain cognition as the result of operations on signals performed at nodes in a network and passed between them that are implemented by specific neurons and their connections in circuits in the brain. The contrasting Hopfieldian view explains cognition as the result of transformations between or movement within representational spaces that are implemented by neural populations. Thus, the Hopfieldian view relegates details regarding the identity of and connections between specific neurons to the status of secondary explainers. Only the Hopfieldian approach has the representational and computational resources needed to develop novel neurofunctional objects that can serve as primary explainers of cognition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33859408What 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.