ArticleExperimental brain research2024
Back and front peripersonal space: behavioural and EMG evidence of top-down and bottom-up mechanisms.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have identified a 'defensive graded field' in the peripersonal front space where potential threatening stimuli induce stronger blink responses, mainly modulated by top-down mechanisms, which include various factors, such as proximity to the body, stimulus valence, and social cues. However, very little is known about the mechanisms responsible for representation of the back space and the possible role of bottom-up information. By means of acoustic stimuli, we evaluated individuals' representation for front and back space in an ambiguous environment that offered some degree of uncertainty in terms of both distance (close vs. far) and front-back egocentric location of sound sources. We aimed to consider verbal responses about localization of sound sources and EMG data on blink reflex. Results suggested that stimulus distance evaluations were better explained by subjective front-back discrimination, rather than real position. Moreover, blink response data were also better explained by subjective front-back discrimination. Taken together, these findings suggest that the mechanisms that dictate blink response magnitude might also affect sound localization (possible bottom-up mechanism), probably interacting with top-down mechanisms that modulate stimuli location and distance. These findings are interpreted within the defensive peripersonal framework, suggesting a close relationship between bottom-up and top-down mechanisms on spatial representation.
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.