Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36810992›Full record

ArticlePsychology in Russia : state of the art2021

Free Will as a Paradox: Empirical Evaluation of the Construct of Everyday Consciousness.

Eugeny L Dotsenko, Olga V Pchelina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology in Russia : state of the art, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Eugeny L DotsenkoState University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia.
Olga V PchelinaState University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Free will belongs to the category of phenomena that are actively discussed in scientific discourse but are neither verified nor proven false. Free will is studied in philosophy, neuroscience, and psychology. We discuss this pluralism, multiplicity of perceptions, and the parties' arguments in the theoretical part of this article. We approach the existing polemics from the point of view of a person who is in the moment of making a decision and taking responsibility for it. The usual paradoxes are mitigated if we consider free will through the concepts underlying everyday consciousness. Objective: Our aim is to introduce into the discussion of free will an understanding of its nature as a construct of everyday consciousness, one which acts as a factor in increasing the personal maturity of vital decisions. We also discuss the arguments of the various meta-positions in the dispute about free will. Design: Our empirical research was designed as a modification of the experiments on imposed attitudes. The sample consisted of 340 people ages 30-50 years. Results: The level of maturity of actions by the subjects who received the set for determinism was lower than that of the subjects who received the set for free will (U 5133; p = 0.014). Conclusion: Our study showed that the stronger a person's belief in free will, the more personally mature that person's choices - actions - are; and that the more active that belief in free will, the more effective are their efforts to overcome social pressure.

Indexed as

belief in free willdecision makingdeed (action)free willfree will as illusion.neurosciencepersonality

Identifiers

PMID36810992
PMCPMC9939038

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.