Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34803638›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2021

Involvement of Visual Mismatch Negativity in Access Processing to Visual Awareness.

Yuki Kurita, Tomokazu Urakawa, Osamu Araki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Yuki KuritaDepartment of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan.
Tomokazu UrakawaDepartment of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan.
Osamu ArakiDepartment of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychophysiological studies with electroencephalography, focusing on the dynamical aspect of neural correlate of consciousness, reported that visual awareness negativity and P3 enhancement are observed at a latency, 200-300 ms after the visual stimulus onset, when the visual stimulus is consciously perceived. However, access processing to visual awareness (APVA) immediately before conscious perception still remains at the earlier stage of visual sensory processing, though there is little known regarding this subject. The present study hypothesized that visual mismatch negativity (vMMN), which reflects automatic change detection at a latency of 130-250 ms, might be involved in the APVA. In a previous study, vMMN was reported to be evoked by the deviant stimulus that is not consciously perceived in binocular rivalry. To clarify whether the visual change detection affects APVA, we conducted a modified experiment of oddball paradigm on binocular rivalry. The results showed a significant correlation between enhancement of vMMN amplitude and facilitation of perceptual alternation when the unconscious deviant was presented. This implies that vMMN is relevant to the APVA, which is a novel role of vMMN. In early visual processing, the attentional mechanism associated with vMMN is suggested to play an important role in unconscious neural processing at an earlier stage of visual awareness.

Indexed as

binocular rivalryevent-related potentialfast visual processingunconscious processingvisual awarenessvisual mismatch negativity

Identifiers

PMID34803638
PMCPMC8603928

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.