Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39005035›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024

Running away from the marshmallow: the relevance of behaviour settings for a situated science of self-control.

Annemarie Kalis, Josephine Pascoe, Miguel Segundo Ortin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 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. People, places, things and communities: expanding behaviour settings theory in the twenty-first century.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
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

3 authors.

Annemarie KalisDepartment of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Utrecht University , Utrecht 3512 BL, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8574-492X
Josephine PascoeDepartment of Philosophy, University of Murcia , Murcia 30100, Spain.
Miguel Segundo OrtinDepartment of Philosophy, University of Murcia , Murcia 30100, Spain.

Funding

Ministerio de Ciencia e InnovaciónNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The behaviour settings approach was introduced as a means to study the variability of human beings' behaviour outside the lab. More recently, it has been argued that it also provides a fruitful avenue for developing situated accounts of cognition. This article will provide a proof of concept for the latter suggestion, focusing on the science of self-control. Self-control is the ability of individuals to pursue goals they value in the face of conflicting motivations. The hypothesis we bring forward is that this ability should be understood as a set of skills by which individuals modulate their relation to their environment, more specifically the behaviour settings they inhabit. With this conception of self-control in hand, we will take a critical look at well-known experiments involving delayed gratification tasks and propose concrete suggestions on how to improve them. This will bring us to the conclusion that the behaviour settings framework might have a valuable role to play in developing a situated science of self-control. This article is part of the theme issue 'People, places, things and communities: expanding behaviour settings theory in the twenty-first century'.

Indexed as

Self-ControlCognitionDelay DiscountingHumansMotivationbehaviour settingsself-controlsituated cognitionwillpower

Identifiers

PMID39005035
PMCPMC11338581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.