ArticleCognitive psychology2026
Perceiving event structure in brief actions.
Article in Cognitive psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Motor abstraction training generalizes to the refinement of specific movement patterns.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
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
Event segmentation is a fundamental component of human perception and cognition. The field of event cognition studies how people decide where distinct events occur in incoming sensory data, how these "event boundaries" alter decision-making and memory processes, how events reveal themselves in neural activity, and how events may be represented within perception itself. The latter point is critical - the representation of events in the first place is filtered through perception. But what counts as a minimal event that is perceptible to humans? And to what extent is the perceptual representation of minimal events driven by physical properties within stimuli (e.g., sudden changes of a tennis ball's direction when one player strikes it) versus the semantic structure of events (e.g., "step one" versus "step two" of a tennis serve)? Here, across seven preregistered experiments, we explore the perceptual representation of event structure within single brief actions, and dissociate the roles of visual features and semantic structures in the perceptual segmentation of minimal events. First, participants produced boundary labels by segmenting videos of brief physical actions (e.g., kicking a ball). Then, separate groups of observers were asked to visually detect subtle disruptions in the video clips, unaware that the disruptions systematically occurred at boundary versus non-boundary timepoints. The results consistently showed an interfering effect of event boundaries on the detection of disruptions, suggesting a spontaneous perceptual representation of action structure even in very brief single actions. Moreover, boundary effects were strongest when stimuli were presented in recognizable forms versus distorted forms that only preserved lower-level features. Thus, automatic and rapid perceptual segmentation of single actions that only last several seconds may be driven by both sensory cues and our internal models of the world.
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.