ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2021
Effects of affective content and motivational context on neural gain functions during naturalistic scene perception.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Methods for Mass Univariate Analyses of Human EEG: Empirical Data and Simulations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Setting the tone: crossmodal emotional face-voice combinations in continuous flash suppression.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Decoding the temporal dynamics of affective scene processing.NeuroImage · 2022Article
- Recognition of Emotional and Neutral Visual Scenes in Carriers of the MAOA, COMT, DRD4, and 5HT2A Gene Polymorphisms.Psychology in Russia : state of the art · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Visual scene processing is modulated by semantic, motivational, and emotional factors, in addition to physical scene statistics. An open question is to what extent those factors affect low-level visual processing. One index of low-level visual processing is the contrast response function (CRF), representing the change in neural or psychophysical gain with increasing stimulus contrast. Here we aimed to (a) establish the use of an electrophysiological technique for assessing CRFs with complex emotional scenes and (b) examine the effects of motivational context and emotional content on CRFs elicited by naturalistic stimuli, including faces and complex scenes (humans, animals). Motivational context varied by expectancy of threat (a noxious noise) versus safety. CRFs were measured in 18 participants by means of sweep steady-state visual evoked potentials. Results showed a facilitation in visuocortical sensitivity (contrast gain) under threat, compared with safe conditions, across all stimulus categories. Facial stimuli prompted heightened neural response gain, compared with scenes. Within the scenes, response gain was smaller for scenes high in emotional arousal, compared with low-arousing scenes, consistent with interference effects of emotional content. These findings support the notion that motivational context alters the contrast sensitivity of cortical tissue, differing from changes in response gain (activation) when visual cues themselves carry motivational/affective relevance.
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.