ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Peripersonal space: why so last-second?
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 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.
- Visual attention towards virtual humans as a function of spatial distance and emotional expression: an eye-tracking study.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Semantic processing and individual suggestibility modulate motor preparation and perceived distance for looming sounds entering the peripersonal space.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Minds in movement: embodied cognition in the age of artificial intelligence.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A vast range of neurophysiological, neuropsychological and behavioural results in monkeys and humans have shown that the immediate surroundings of the body, also known as peripersonal space (PPS), are processed in a unique way. Three roles have been ascribed to PPS mechanisms: to react to threats, to avoid obstacles and to act on objects. However, in many circumstances, one does not wait for objects or agents to enter PPS to plan these behaviours. Typically, one has more chances to survive if one starts running away from the lion when one sees it in the distance than if it is a few steps away. PPS makes sense in shortsighted creatures but we are not such creatures. The crucial question is thus twofold: (i) why are these adaptive processes triggered only at the last second or even milliseconds? And (ii) what is their exact contribution, especially for defensive and navigational behaviours? Here, we propose that PPS mechanisms correspond to a plan B, useful in unpredictable situations or when other anticipatory mechanisms have failed. Furthermore, we argue that there are energetic, cognitive and behavioural costs to PPS mechanisms, which explain why this plan B is triggered only at the last second. This article is part of the theme issue 'Minds in movement: embodied cognition in the age of artificial intelligence'.
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.