Front. Hum. Neurosci.Frontiers in Human NeuroscienceFront. Hum. Neurosci.1662-5161Frontiers Media S.A.10.3389/fnhum.2024.1507296Human NeuroscienceCorrectionCorrigendum: A minimal Turing test: reciprocal sensorimotor contingencies for interaction detectionBaronePamela12*BediaManuel G.34GomilaAntoni121Department of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands, Palma, Spain2Human Evolution and Cognition Group (EvoCog), University of the Balearic, IFISC, Associated Unit to CSIC, Palma, Spain3Department of Computer Science and Systems Engineering, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain4Interactive Systems, Adaptivity, Autonomy and Cognition Lab, Aragón Institute of Engineering Research, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
Approved by: Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
A corrigendum on A minimal Turing test: reciprocal sensorimotor contingencies for interaction detection by Barone, P., Bedia, M. G., and Gomila, A. (2020). Front. Hum. Neurosci. 14:102. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00102Turing testinteractionsensorimotor contingenciesreciprocityperceptual crossingsection-at-acceptanceCognitive Neuroscience
In the published article, there was an error in Figure 1 as published. The probability of success for block 3 in the bot condition should be 0.70, as correctly stated in Table 1 and the second paragraph of the Results section. However, in Figure 1, this value is incorrectly shown as 0.95. The corrected Figure 1 and its caption appear below.
Successes and crossings per type of agent and block in Study 1. (A) Probability of success in each block per type of agent. The horizontal dashed line represents chance level (50%). (B) Mean number of crossings in each block per type of agent. Error bars depict 95% confidence intervals.
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.