Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33169287›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2021

Saccadic scanpath length: an index for human threat conditioning.

Yanfang Xia, Filip Melinscak, Dominik R Bach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2021. 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

3 authors.

Yanfang XiaUniversity of Zurich, Lenggstrasse 31, CH-8032, Zurich, Switzerland. yanfang.xia@uzh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9885-1748
Filip MelinscakUniversity of Zurich, Lenggstrasse 31, CH-8032, Zurich, Switzerland.
Dominik R BachUniversity of Zurich, Lenggstrasse 31, CH-8032, Zurich, Switzerland. d.bach@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Threat-conditioned cues are thought to capture overt attention in a bottom-up process. Quantification of this phenomenon typically relies on cue competition paradigms. Here, we sought to exploit gaze patterns during exclusive presentation of a visual conditioned stimulus, in order to quantify human threat conditioning. To this end, we capitalized on a summary statistic of visual search during CS presentation, scanpath length. During a simple delayed threat conditioning paradigm with full-screen monochrome conditioned stimuli (CS), we observed shorter scanpath length during CS+ compared to CS- presentation. Retrodictive validity, i.e., effect size to distinguish CS+ and CS-, was maximized by considering a 2-s time window before US onset. Taking into account the shape of the scan speed response resulted in similar retrodictive validity. The mechanism underlying shorter scanpath length appeared to be longer fixation duration and more fixation on the screen center during CS+ relative to CS- presentation. These findings were replicated in a second experiment with similar setup, and further confirmed in a third experiment using full-screen patterns as CS. This experiment included an extinction session during which scanpath differences appeared to extinguish. In a fourth experiment with auditory CS and instruction to fixate screen center, no scanpath length differences were observed. In conclusion, our study suggests scanpath length as a visual search summary statistic, which may be used as complementary measure to quantify threat conditioning with retrodictive validity similar to that of skin conductance responses.

Indexed as

Conditioning, ClassicalFearAttentionConditioning, OperantCuesExtinction, PsychologicalHumansAttentional biasFear conditioningPavlovian conditioningSaccadic eye movementThreat memory

Identifiers

PMID33169287
PMCPMC8367914

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.