ArticleHuman brain mapping2024
The metacontrol of event segmentation-A neurophysiological and behavioral perspective.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- How the influence of cingulate-lingual interactions on event segmentation changes from early to late adolescence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Auricular transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation stabilizes event segmentation through modulation of working memory representations.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Time-resolved aperiodic dynamics in event segmentation in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Altered neural oscillatory dynamics underlie reduced anticipatory schema use during event segmentation in adolescents with High-Functioning Autism Spectrum disorder.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2026Article
- The metacontrol of event segmentation-A neurophysiological and behavioral perspective.Human brain mapping · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During our everyday life, the constant flow of information is divided into discrete events, a process conceptualized in Event Segmentation Theory (EST). How people perform event segmentation and the resulting granularity of encapsulated segments likely depends on their metacontrol style. Yet, the underlying neural mechanisms remain undetermined. The current study examines how the metacontrol style affects event segmentation through the analysis of EEG data using multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) and source localization analysis. We instructed two groups of healthy participants to either segment a movie as fine-grained as possible (fine-grain group) or provided no such instruction (free-segmentation group). The fine-grain group showed more segments and a higher likelihood to set event boundaries upon scene changes, which supports the notion that cognitive control influences segmentation granularity. On a neural level, representational dynamics were decodable 400 ms prior to the decision to close a segment and open a new one, and especially fronto-polar regions (BA10) were associated with this representational dynamic. Groups differed in their use of this representational dynamics to guide behavior and there was a higher sensitivity to incoming information in the Fine-grain group. Moreover, a higher likelihood to set event boundaries was reflected by activity increases in the insular cortex suggesting an increased monitoring of potentially relevant upcoming events. The study connects the EST with the metacontrol framework and relates these to overarching neural concepts of prefrontal cortex function.
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.