Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34019217›Full record

ReviewBehavior research methods2021

The rubber hand illusion in children: What are we measuring?

Lysha Lee, Winn Ma, Marjolein Kammers

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Behavior research methods, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Lysha Lee *Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Winn Ma *Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Marjolein KammersMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. marjolein.kammers@unimelb.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rubber hand illusion (RHI) is a much-studied bodily illusion that has been used in a wide number of populations to investigate the plasticity of the mental body representation. In adult participants, the wide adoption of the illusion has led to a proliferation of experimental variations of the illusion, and with that, considerable apparent inconsistencies in both empirical results and conceptual interpretations. In turn, this makes it challenging to integrate empirical findings and to identify what those findings together can tell us about the representation of the body in the brain. More recently, scientists have started applying the illusion to populations of children, in order to better understand how body representations develop in both typically developing children and in clinical populations. With this field now starting to expand, we believe it is both urgent and important to prevent unintended methodological variability from hindering the consistency of the paediatric literature as it has the adult literature. With this aim in mind, we review the 12 currently available paediatric RHI studies, and summarise their key methodological choices and conceptual definitions. We highlight a number of important discrepancies, particularly where seemingly equivalent analysis choices might significantly affect the interpretation of results, and make recommendations for future studies. We hope this will allow this important and emerging field to benefit from the synergy that results from multiple studies using convergent and consistent empirical methods.

Indexed as

IllusionsTouch PerceptionAdultBody ImageChildHandHumansProprioceptionVisual PerceptionBody representationChildhoodDevelopmentRubber hand illusion

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.