ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2022
Every product needs a process: unpacking joint commitment as a process across species.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Language-Invariant Strategies of Navigating Transitions in Joint Activities: Forms and Functions of Coordination Markers.Cognitive science · 2025Article
- Can Large Language Models Simulate Spoken Human Conversations?Cognitive science · 2025Article
- Potential evidence of reengagement attempts following interruptions of a triadic social game in bonobos and chimpanzees.PloS one · 2025Article
- Human and nonhuman norms: a dimensional framework.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Shared cross-cultural principles underlie human prosocial behavior at the smallest scale.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Bodies at play: the role of intercorporeality and bodily affordances in coordinating social play in chimpanzees in the wild.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Interaction and ostension: the myth of 4th-order intentionality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Review
- Revisiting the human 'interaction engine': comparative approaches to social action coordination.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Article
- How 2- and 4-year-old children coordinate social interactions with peers.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joint commitment, the feeling of mutual obligation binding participants in a joint action, is typically conceptualized as arising by the expression and acceptance of a promise. This account limits the possibilities of investigating fledgling forms of joint commitment in actors linguistically less well-endowed than adult humans. The feeling of mutual obligation is one aspect of joint commitment (the
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.