ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2024
Computation on Demand: Action-Specific Representations of Visual Task Features Arise during Distinct Movement Phases.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Action Intentions Shape Task- and Phase-Specific Integration of Object Features.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Phase-Dependent Visual and Sensorimotor Integration of Features for Grasp Computations before and after Effector Specification.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The intention to act influences the computations of various task-relevant features. However, little is known about the time course of these computations. Furthermore, it is commonly held that these computations are governed by conjunctive neural representations of the features. But, support for this view comes from paradigms arbitrarily combining task features and affordances, thus requiring representations in working memory. Therefore, the present study used electroencephalography and a well-rehearsed task with features that afford minimal working memory representations to investigate the temporal evolution of feature representations and their potential integration in the brain. Female and male human participants grasped objects or touched them with a knuckle. Objects had different shapes and were made of heavy or light materials with shape and weight being relevant for grasping, not for "knuckling." Using multivariate analysis showed that representations of object shape were similar for grasping and knuckling. However, only for grasping did early shape representations reactivate at later phases of grasp planning, suggesting that sensorimotor control signals feed back to the early visual cortex. Grasp-specific representations of material/weight only arose during grasp execution after object contact during the load phase. A trend for integrated representations of shape and material also became grasp-specific but only briefly during the movement onset. These results suggest that the brain generates action-specific representations of relevant features as required for the different subcomponents of its action computations. Our results argue against the view that goal-directed actions inevitably join all features of a task into a sustained and unified neural representation.
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.