Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37546477›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023

Comparing reappraisal and acceptance strategies to understand the neural architecture of emotion regulation: a meta-analytic approach.

Bianca Monachesi, Alessandro Grecucci, Parisa Ahmadi Ghomroudi, Irene Messina

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Bianca MonachesiClinical and Affective Neuroscience Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences-DiPSCo, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Alessandro GrecucciClinical and Affective Neuroscience Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences-DiPSCo, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Parisa Ahmadi GhomroudiClinical and Affective Neuroscience Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences-DiPSCo, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Irene MessinaUniversitas Mercatorum, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In the emotion regulation literature, the amount of neuroimaging studies on cognitive reappraisal led the impression that the same top-down, control-related neural mechanisms characterize all emotion regulation strategies. However, top-down processes may coexist with more bottom-up and emotion-focused processes that partially bypass the recruitment of executive functions. A case in point is acceptance-based strategies. Method: To better understand neural commonalities and differences behind different emotion regulation processes, in the present study, we applied the Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) method to perform a meta-analysis on fMRI studies investigating task-related activity of reappraisal and acceptance. Both increased and decreased brain activity was taken into account in the contrast and conjunction analysis between the two strategies. Results: Results showed increased activity in left-inferior frontal gyrus and insula for both strategies, and decreased activity in the basal ganglia for reappraisal, and decreased activity in limbic regions for acceptance. Discussion: These findings are discussed in the context of a model of common and specific neural mechanisms of emotion regulation that support and expand the previous dual-routes models. We suggest that emotion regulation may rely on a core inhibitory circuit, and on strategy-specific top-down and bottom-up processes distinct for different strategies.

Indexed as

acceptanceactivation likelihood estimation methodemotion regulation processesmeta-analysisreappraisal

Identifiers

PMID37546477
PMCPMC10403290

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.