Cited by 28Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

Imagining the future self through thought experiments

Open access
Miyamoto, Kentaro, Rushworth, Matthew F.S., Shea, Nicholas·2023·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

The ability of the mind to conceptualize what is not present is essential. It allows us to reason counterfactually about what might have happened had events unfolded differently or had another course of action been taken. It allows us to think about what might happen - to perform 'Gedankenexperimente' (thought experiments) - before we act. However, the cognitive and neural mechanisms mediating this ability are poorly understood. We suggest that the frontopolar cortex (FPC) keeps track of and evaluates alternative choices (what we might have done), whereas the anterior lateral prefrontal cortex (alPFC) compares simulations of possible future scenarios (what we might do) and evaluates their reward values. Together, these brain regions support the construction of suppositional scenarios.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2023.01.005

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [31]31. [Blanke, O. (2012) Multisensory brain mechanisms of bodily selfconsciousness. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 556 -571](http://refhub.elsevier.com/S1364-6613(23)00023-2/rf0155)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miyamoto, K., Rushworth, M. F. S., & Shea, N.
Affiliations
  • RIKEN Center for Brain Science (JP)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Miyamoto, Kentaro
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-05
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
446-455
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4321213170
Cited by
28
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 17
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SAS-Space (University of London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Research Council
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP22H00092, JP22K18665)
  • Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (JP22wm0525034)
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
  • Wellcome Trust (221794/Z/20/Z)
  • Horizon 2020 (681422)
  • Medical Research Council (MR/P024955/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
thought experiments, counterfactual reasoning, future self, frontopolar cortex, scenario simulation, reward evaluation, alternative selection
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Prefrontal Cortex

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review