Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35378719›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2022

Stress effects on the top-down control of visuospatial attention: Evidence from cue-dependent alpha oscillations.

Mauro F Larra, Xinwei Zhang, Johannes B Finke, Hartmut Schächinger, Edmund Wascher, Stefan Arnau

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2022. 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mauro F LarraLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystr. 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany. larra@ifado.de.
Xinwei ZhangDivision of Clinical Psychophysiology, Institute of Psychobiology, University of Trier, 54290, Trier, Germany.
Johannes B FinkeDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Siegen, 57076, Siegen, Germany.
Hartmut SchächingerDivision of Clinical Psychophysiology, Institute of Psychobiology, University of Trier, 54290, Trier, Germany.
Edmund WascherLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystr. 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany.
Stefan ArnauLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystr. 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany.
TU Dortmund University · DEUniversität Trier · DELeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors · DEUniversity of Siegen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stress is assumed to inhibit the top-down control of attention and to facilitate bottom-up processing. Evidence from human experiments, however, remains scarce. Previous studies have addressed how stress affects the interplay of bottom-up and top-down mechanisms of attention. A key open question is in how far such effects can actually be attributed to a stress-induced modulation of top-down attention control. We sought to isolate top-down from bottom-up effects by assessing stress effects on anticipatory changes in alpha oscillations that precede stimulus processing. Participants performed in a cued target detection task in which a cue prompted them to covertly shift their attention to left or right screen positions, 20 min after being exposed to the bilateral feet cold pressor test or a warm water control procedure. The stressor led to a substantial increase in cortisol, peaking 20 min post stressor, along with rises in heart rate, blood pressure, and subjective ratings of stress and arousal. As expected, cued attention deployment led to higher alpha power over posterior electrodes contralateral versus ipsilateral to the attended hemifield during the cue-target interval. Importantly, this purely endogenous effect was potentiated by stress, however, significant differences were restricted to the middle of the cue-target interval and thus temporally separated from the appearance of the target. These results indicate that stress does not impair top-down attentional control per se but may introduce a qualitative change modulating the way attention is deployed to meet action goals.

Indexed as

ArousalCuesHumansPhotic StimulationVisual PerceptionAcute stressAlphaCold pressor testCortisolEEGExecutive functionsInformation processing

Identifiers

PMID35378719
PMCPMC9293795
OpenAlexW4226117861

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.