Information for "Is attention to Intention Fact or artifact"
Basic information
| Display title | Is attention to Intention Fact or artifact |
| Default sort key | Is attention to Intention Fact or artifact |
| Page length (in bytes) | 914 |
| Page ID | 1573 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
Page protection
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
Edit history
| Page creator | WikiSysop (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 11:26, 24 September 2008 |
| Latest editor | WikiSysop (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 14:15, 25 July 2020 |
| Total number of edits | 9 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Page properties
| Transcluded template (1) | Template used on this page: |
... more about "Is attention to Intention Fact or artifact"
Lau et al. (2004) aimed to identify throug … Lau et al. (2004) aimed to identify through fMRI the brain region that codes for the intention to perform a motor act, and concluded that the pre-Supplementary Motor Area is where this happens. Machado and Silva’s account (2007) for these results is similar to previous attempts (Bridgeman, 1985; Gomes, 2002) to interpret Libet’s original data (Libet et al., 1983). To the extent of our knowledge, however, such accounts have never been subjected to empirical test. Our objective with this paper was to provide such a test.ith this paper was to provide such a test. +
Date"Date" is a type and predefined property provided by Semantic MediaWiki to represent date values.
September 1, 2008 +