ArticlePloS one2020
Dissociable mappings of tonic and phasic pupillary features onto cognitive processes involved in mental arithmetic.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive biotypes identified through ECG-derived workload and behavioral accuracy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Automatic detection of cognitive events using machine learning and understanding models' interpretations of human cognition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The effects of emotional arousal on pupil size depend on luminance.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Effects of internally directed cognition on smooth pursuit eye movements: A systematic examination of perceptual decoupling.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Arousal-based pupil modulation is dictated by luminance.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Correction: Dissociable mappings of tonic and phasic pupillary features onto cognitive processes involved in mental arithmetic.PloS one · 2021Article
- "Blue Sky Effect": Contextual Influences on Pupil Size During Naturalistic Visual Search.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pupil size modulations have been used for decades as a window into the mind, and several pupillary features have been implicated in a variety of cognitive processes. Thus, a general challenge facing the field of pupillometry has been understanding which pupil features should be most relevant for explaining behavior in a given task domain. In the present study, a longitudinal design was employed where participants completed 8 biweekly sessions of a classic mental arithmetic task for the purposes of teasing apart the relationships between tonic/phasic pupil features (baseline, peak amplitude, peak latency) and two task-related cognitive processes including mental processing load (indexed by math question difficulty) and decision making (indexed by response times). We used multi-level modeling to account for individual variation while identifying pupil-to-behavior relationships at the single-trial and between-session levels. We show a dissociation between phasic and tonic features with peak amplitude and latency (but not baseline) driven by ongoing task-related processing, whereas baseline was driven by state-level effects that changed over a longer time period (i.e. weeks). Finally, we report a dissociation between peak amplitude and latency whereby amplitude reflected surprise and processing load, and latency reflected decision making times.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.