Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40394366›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025

Adding meaningful distal action effects in feature binding.

Nicolas D Münster, Philip Schmalbrock, Christian Beste, Alexander Münchau, Christian Frings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Nicolas D MünsterDepartment of Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, Universitätsring 15, D54296, Trier, Germany. muenstern@uni-trier.de.
Philip SchmalbrockDepartment of Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, Universitätsring 15, D54296, Trier, Germany.
Christian BesteDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Cognitive Neurophysiology, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Alexander MünchauInstitute of Systems Motor Science, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Christian FringsDepartment of Psychology, Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, Universitätsring 15, D54296, Trier, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FOR 2698Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FR2133/18-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Event files that bind features of stimuli, responses, and action effects figure prominently in contemporary views of action control. When a feature repeats, the previous event file including this feature is retrieved and can then influence current performance. It is still unclear, however, what terminates an event file. A tacit assumption is that registering the distal (e.g., visual, or auditory) sensory consequences of an action (i.e., the "action effect") terminates the event file, thereby making it available for retrieval. Yet recently Frings et al. (2023) tested different distal action-effect conditions in standard stimulus-response (S-R) binding tasks and observed no modulation of S-R binding effects. It is conceivable though that the impact of distal action effects on feature binding hinges on the action mode of agents with intention-based mode (as compared to a stimulus-based mode) of action particularly emphasizing the possible impact of a meaningful distal action effect. Thus, we analyzed semantically meaningful distal action effects (participants switched simulated light bulbs on and off) in three experiments (N

Indexed as

Pattern Recognition, VisualPsychomotor PerformanceAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAction effectsEvent file terminationFeature binding

Identifiers

PMID40394366
PMCPMC12204946

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.