Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39449391›Full record

ReviewVision (Basel, Switzerland)2024

The "What" and "How" of Pantomime Actions.

Raymond R MacNeil, James T Enns

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vision (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Raymond R MacNeilDepartment of Psychology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada.
James T EnnsDepartment of Psychology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3676-8316

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada PGSD3-547166-2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pantomimes are human actions that simulate ideas, objects, and events, commonly used in conversation, performance art, and gesture-based interfaces for computing and controlling robots. Yet, their underlying neurocognitive mechanisms are not well understood. In this review, we examine pantomimes through two parallel lines of research: (1) the two visual systems (TVS) framework for visually guided action, and (2) the neuropsychological literature on limb apraxia. Historically, the TVS framework has considered pantomime actions as expressions of conscious perceptual processing in the ventral stream, but an emerging view is that they are jointly influenced by ventral and dorsal stream processing. Within the apraxia literature, pantomimes were historically viewed as learned motor schemas, but there is growing recognition that they include creative and improvised actions. Both literatures now recognize that pantomimes are often created spontaneously, sometimes drawing on memory and always requiring online cognitive control. By highlighting this convergence of ideas, we aim to encourage greater collaboration across these two research areas, in an effort to better understand these uniquely human behaviors.

Indexed as

apraxiacognitive controldorsal streamgraspingpantomimetool usetwo visual systemsventral streamvisually guided action

Identifiers

PMID39449391
PMCPMC11503306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.