Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35608254›Full record

ArticleeLife2022

Social-affective features drive human representations of observed actions.

Diana C Dima, Tyler M Tomita, Christopher J Honey, Leyla Isik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Processing Stages for Social Interaction Recognition.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. The Role of Agentive and Physical Forces in the Neural Representation of Motion Events.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Seeing social interactions.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2023
    Review
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.

Diana C DimaDepartment of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9612-5574
Tyler M TomitaDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States.
Christopher J HoneyDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0745-5089
Leyla IsikDepartment of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans observe actions performed by others in many different visual and social settings. What features do we extract and attend when we view such complex scenes, and how are they processed in the brain? To answer these questions, we curated two large-scale sets of naturalistic videos of everyday actions and estimated their perceived similarity in two behavioral experiments. We normed and quantified a large range of visual, action-related, and social-affective features across the stimulus sets. Using a cross-validated variance partitioning analysis, we found that social-affective features predicted similarity judgments better than, and independently of, visual and action features in both behavioral experiments. Next, we conducted an electroencephalography experiment, which revealed a sustained correlation between neural responses to videos and their behavioral similarity. Visual, action, and social-affective features predicted neural patterns at early, intermediate, and late stages, respectively, during this behaviorally relevant time window. Together, these findings show that social-affective features are important for perceiving naturalistic actions and are extracted at the final stage of a temporal gradient in the brain.

Indexed as

BrainBrain MappingElectroencephalographyHumansJudgmentPhotic StimulationVisual Perceptionaction perceptionbehavioral similarityhumanneurosciencetemporal dynamics

Identifiers

PMID35608254
PMCPMC9159752

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.