Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31263144›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception.

E J Hird, C Charalambous, W El-Deredy, A K P Jones, D Talmi

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. How the magnitude and precision of pain predictions shape pain experiences.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Placebo Effect in Psychosis: Why It Matters and How to Measure It.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

E J HirdDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. emily.hird@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6599-7292
C CharalambousSchool of Mathematics, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
W El-DeredyDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
A K P JonesDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
D TalmiDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perception of sensory stimulation is influenced by numerous psychological variables. One example is placebo analgesia, where expecting low pain causes a painful stimulus to feel less painful. Yet, because pain evolved to signal threats to survival, it should be maladaptive for highly-erroneous expectations to yield unrealistic pain experiences. Therefore, we hypothesised that a cue followed by a highly discrepant stimulus intensity, which generates a large prediction error, will have a weaker influence on the perception of that stimulus. To test this hypothesis we collected two independent pain-cueing datasets. The second dataset and the analysis plan were preregistered ( https://osf.io/5r6z7/ ). Regression modelling revealed that reported pain intensities were best explained by a quartic polynomial model of the prediction error. The results indicated that the influence of cues on perceived pain decreased when stimulus intensity was very different from expectations, suggesting that prediction error size has an immediate functional role in pain perception.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCuesDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMaleModels, StatisticalPain PerceptionPhotic StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31263144
PMCPMC6602973

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.