Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34088941›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Body dynamics of gait affect value-based decisions.

Eric Grießbach, Francesca Incagli, Oliver Herbort, Rouwen Cañal-Bruland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Online Movements Reflect Ongoing Deliberation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Where scrollbars are clicked, and why.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Embodied decisions during walking.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022
    Article
  10. The road towards understanding embodied decisions.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021
    Review
  11. 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

4 authors.

Eric GrießbachDepartment for the Psychology of Human Movement and Sport, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany. eric.griessbach@uni-jena.de.
Francesca IncagliDepartment of Psychology, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Oliver HerbortDepartment of Psychology, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Rouwen Cañal-BrulandDepartment for the Psychology of Human Movement and Sport, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany. rouwen.canal.bruland@uni-jena.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Choosing among different options typically entails weighing their anticipated costs and benefits. Previous research has predominantly focused on situations, where the costs and benefits of choices are known before an action is effectuated. Yet many decisions in daily life are made on the fly, for instance, making a snack choice while walking through the grocery store. Notably, the costs of actions change dynamically while moving. Therefore, in this study we examined whether the concurrent action dynamics of gait form part of and affect value-based decisions. In three experiments, participants had to decide which lateral (left vs. right) target (associated with different rewards) they would go to, while they were already walking. Results showed that the target choice was biased by the alternating stepping behavior, even at the expense of receiving less reward. These findings provide evidence that whole-body action dynamics affect value-based decisions.

Identifiers

PMID34088941
PMCPMC8178314

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.