ArticleScientific reports2022
Temporal judgments of actions following unilateral brain damage.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns of cognitive and motor decline in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and ageing in healthy populations.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2026Article
- Dual-Task Interference Increases Variability in Sub-Second Repetitive Motor Timing.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- How Action Shapes Temporal Judgments: A Study in Brain Damaged Patients Through Immersive Virtual Reality.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The role of vmPFC in accessing the temporality of life events for mental time travel.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Assessment of the Motor and Non-Motor Aspects of Anosognosia for Hemiplegia: A Historical Review.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- What I think she thinks about my paralysed body: Social inferences about disability-related content in anosognosia for hemiplegia.Journal of neuropsychology · 2025Article
- Malleability and fluidity of time perception.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sense of time is a complex construct, and its neural correlates remain to date in most part unknown. To complicate the frame, physical attributes of the stimulus, such as its intensity or movement, influence temporal perception. Although previous studies have shown that time perception can be compromised after a brain lesion, the evidence on the role of the left and right hemispheres are meager. In two experiments, the study explores the ability of temporal estimation of multi-second actions and non-biological movements in 33 patients suffering from unilateral brain lesion. Furthermore, the modulatory role of induced embodiment processes is investigated. The results reveal a joint contribution of the two hemispheres depending not only on different durations but also on the presence of actions. Indeed, the left hemisphere damaged patients find it difficult to estimate 4500 ms or longer durations, while the right hemisphere damaged patients fail in 3000 ms durations. Furthermore, the former fail when a biological action is shown, while the latter fail in non-biological movement. Embodiment processes have a modulatory effect only after right hemisphere lesions. Among neuropsychological variables, only spatial neglect influences estimation of non-biological movement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.