Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41693743›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognition2026

Bindings for Action: Bridging the Gap Between Theories of Procedural Working Memory and Action Control Research.

Gidon T Frischkorn, Isabel Courage, Hannah Dames, David Dignath, Christina U Pfeuffer, Moritz Schiltenwolf, Andrea Kiesel, Klaus Oberauer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognition, 2026. 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

8 authors.

Gidon T FrischkornInstitute of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5055-9764
Isabel CourageInstitute of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8493-2240
Hannah DamesInstitute of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5800-9401
David DignathInstitute of Psychology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1092-8019
Christina U PfeufferInstitute of Psychology, Catholic University, Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9394-8316
Moritz SchiltenwolfInstitute of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6539-5512
Andrea KieselInstitute of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5564-010X
Klaus OberauerInstitute of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3902-7318

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two research traditions, action control and procedural working memory research, have addressed the question of how humans control actions, largely independently from each other. While both research traditions consider binding as an important mechanism for action control, they conceptualize this mechanism differently. Here, we argue that a comparison and synthesis of both research traditions might lead to a better understanding of the conceptualization of bindings. We first provide a brief overview of recent frameworks developed in the respective research traditions: the BRAC framework (Frings et al., 2020) and the procedural working memory (WM) model (Oberauer, 2013). We then analyze the similarities and differences between the BRAC and WM perspectives. As a first step toward fostering an integrative model of action control, we present an extension of the procedural WM model that can account for the main empirical findings investigated within the BRAC framework and that might serve as a blueprint for future integration.

Indexed as

action controlbindingBRACprocedural working memory

Identifiers

PMID41693743
PMCPMC12904133

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.