Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32127632›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Low and high stimulation frequencies differentially affect automated response selection in the superior parietal cortex - implications for somatosensory area processes.

Julia Friedrich, Christian Beste

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Julia FriedrichCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany. julia.friedrich@uniklinikum-dresden.de.
Christian BesteCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Response inhibition as a central facet of executive functioning is no homogeneous construct. Interference inhibition constitutes a subcomponent of response inhibition and refers to inhibitory control over responses that are automatically triggered by irrelevant stimulus dimensions as measured by the Simon task. While there is evidence that the area-specific modulation of tactile information affects the act of action withholding, effects in the context of interference inhibition remain elusive. We conducted a tactile version of the Simon task with stimuli designed to be predominantly processed in the primary (40 Hz) or secondary (150 Hz) somatosensory cortex. On the basis of EEG recordings, we performed signal decomposition and source localization. Behavioral results reveal that response execution is more efficient when sensory information is mainly processed via SII, compared to SI sensory areas during non-conflicting trials. When accounting for intermingled coding levels by temporally decomposing EEG data, the results show that experimental variations depending on sensory area-specific processing differences specifically affect motor and not sensory processes. Modulations of motor-related processes are linked to activation differences in the superior parietal cortex (BA7). It is concluded that the SII cortical area supporting cognitive preprocessing of tactile input fosters automatic tactile information processing by facilitating stimulus-response mapping in posterior parietal regions.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnalysis of VarianceElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansParietal LobeReaction TimeSomatosensory CortexYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32127632
PMCPMC7054528

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.