Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33948918›Full record

SynthesisPsychonomic bulletin & review2021

Synthesizing the effects of mental simulation on behavior change: Systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis.

Scott N Cole, Debbie M Smith, Kathryn Ragan, Robert Suurmond, Christopher J Armitage

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2021. 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. Trial
  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

5 authors.

Scott N ColeDepartment of Psychology, York Saint John University, York, YO31 7EX, UK.
Debbie M SmithPsychology, Leeds Trinity University, Leeds, LS18 5HD, UK.
Kathryn RaganPsychology, Newcastile University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK.
Robert SuurmondSchool of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, 6229 GT, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Christopher J ArmitageManchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. chris.armitage@manchester.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental simulation of future scenarios is hypothesized to affect future behavior, but a large and inconsistent literature means it is unclear whether, and under what conditions, mental simulation can change people's behavior. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the effects of mental simulation on behavior and examine under what conditions mental simulation works best. An inclusive systematic database search identified 123 (N = 5,685) effect sizes comparing mental simulation to a control group. After applying a multilevel random effects model, a statistically-reliable positive effect of Hedges' g = 0.49, 95% CI [0.37; 0.62] was found, which was significantly different than zero. Using a taxonomy to identify different subtypes of mental simulation (along two dimensions, class [process, performance, outcome] and purpose [whether an inferior, standard, superior version of that behavior is simulated]), it was found that superior simulations garnered more reliable beneficial effects than inferior simulations. These findings have implications for integrating theories of how mental simulations change behavior, how mental simulations are classified, and may help guide professionals seeking evidence-based and cost-effective methods of changing behavior.

Indexed as

BehaviorComputer SimulationHumansBehavior changeMental practiceMental simulationOutcome simulationsProcess simulations

Identifiers

PMID33948918
PMCPMC8500882

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.