Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33848299›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2021

Neurocognitive processing efficiency for discriminating human non-alarm rather than alarm scream calls.

Sascha Frühholz, Joris Dietziker, Matthias Staib, Wiebke Trost

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Vocal display rules in everyday life: when is it appropriate to laugh, sigh or scream?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Rough is salient: a conserved vocal niche to hijack the brain's salience system.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Emotion in Nonverbal Communication: Comparing Animal and Human Vocalizations and Human Text Messages.Emotion review : journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Clap, Clap, Clap - Unsystematic Review Essay on Clapping and Applause.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2023
    Review
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sascha FrühholzCognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6485-3817
Joris DietzikerCognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Matthias StaibCognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Wiebke TrostCognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across many species, scream calls signal the affective significance of events to other agents. Scream calls were often thought to be of generic alarming and fearful nature, to signal potential threats, with instantaneous, involuntary, and accurate recognition by perceivers. However, scream calls are more diverse in their affective signaling nature than being limited to fearfully alarming a threat, and thus the broader sociobiological relevance of various scream types is unclear. Here we used 4 different psychoacoustic, perceptual decision-making, and neuroimaging experiments in humans to demonstrate the existence of at least 6 psychoacoustically distinctive types of scream calls of both alarming and non-alarming nature, rather than there being only screams caused by fear or aggression. Second, based on perceptual and processing sensitivity measures for decision-making during scream recognition, we found that alarm screams (with some exceptions) were overall discriminated the worst, were responded to the slowest, and were associated with a lower perceptual sensitivity for their recognition compared with non-alarm screams. Third, the neural processing of alarm compared with non-alarm screams during an implicit processing task elicited only minimal neural signal and connectivity in perceivers, contrary to the frequent assumption of a threat processing bias of the primate neural system. These findings show that scream calls are more diverse in their signaling and communicative nature in humans than previously assumed, and, in contrast to a commonly observed threat processing bias in perceptual discriminations and neural processes, we found that especially non-alarm screams, and positive screams in particular, seem to have higher efficiency in speeded discriminations and the implicit neural processing of various scream types in humans.

Indexed as

AdultAuditory PathwaysAuditory PerceptionBrainDiscrimination, PsychologicalFearFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePattern Recognition, PhysiologicalRecognition, PsychologySex CharacteristicsVoice RecognitionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33848299
PMCPMC8043411
OpenAlexW3155425633

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.