ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022
Architectural Narrative Shapes Brain Activities Underlying Approach-Avoidance Response: A Case Study of the Stadium.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploratory EEG Feature Profiles During Viewing of Six Combined Indoor Spatial-Color Conditions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Each great architecture tells a story to make its space meaningful. What the stadium tells matters how the individual interacts with it. The potent influence of narrative in shaping our cognitive processing has been revealed and widely used. This influence, however, has not been the focus of researchers in stadium operations. The present study aimed at investigating the influence of the stadium narrative on approach-avoidance responses and the corresponding neural correlates. Participants were presented with a sequence of pictures expressing a story congruent or incongruent with the general profile of the stadium, and were required to make an enter or exit response. Results showed larger amplitudes of N400 for incongruent trials than congruent trials at the end of the narrative, indicating the feasibility of continuity editing procedure for the study of narratives. Moreover, larger amplitudes of LPP were observed in response to the stadium preceded by congruent trials than incongruent trials. This effect was more pronounced in the left than right frontal sites. The LPP suggested that a congruent narrative imparted the stadium approaching affective features, and induced approaching responses, which was consistent with the behavioral and correlational results. Our findings suggested that changes in narrative were sufficient to shape the approach-avoidance responses and the underlying neural correlates. Implications for stadium management and buildings are provided.
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.