ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2026
The Discussion of Free Will and Neurodeterminism: Some Methodological Implications.
Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article critically examines the fundamental tenets of neurodeterminism in the discussion of free will, focusing on three key methodological issues: the personification of the brain as an independent actor, the assumed direct correspondence between neural processes and mental states, and the relationship between action predictability and free will. Through a comprehensive theoretical analysis and four empirical studies involving native Russian and English speakers, the research challenges the neurodeterministic perspective. The studies reveal that, at the level of basic linguistic intuition, free will can coexist with action predictability. Participants consistently interpreted actions as free when they were consciously performed, regardless of their predictability. The research highlights that a necessary condition for discussing free will is conscious awareness of the action, with bodily movements outside conscious control not being considered free.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41691568What 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.