ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Predicting instabilities: an embodied perspective on unstable experiences with art and design.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Order and change in art: towards an active inference account of aesthetic experience.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Aesthetics and predictive processing: grounds and prospects of a fruitful encounter.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Metaphors or mechanism? Predictive coding and a (brief) history of empirical study of the arts.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Fluency, prediction and motivation: how processing dynamics, expectations and epistemic goals shape aesthetic judgements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictive Processing (PP) provides a theoretical framework that describes perception as a process attempting to increase the predictability of stimulations by updating predictions or exploring new sensations. Moreover, perception and action are assumed to be closely linked within this process. While organisms seem to strive for predictability, we sometimes expose ourselves to objects and situations that challenge sense-making-such conditions often break perceptual habits or offer multiple possible meanings. This paper updates a previous qualification of these experiences of 'Semantic Instability' (
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.