Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38395615›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2024

Threat Expectation Does Not Improve Perceptual Discrimination despite Causing Heightened Priority Processing in the Frontoparietal Network.

Nadia Haddara, Dobromir Rahnev

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nadia HaddaraSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 nadiahaddara@gmail.com.
Dobromir RahnevSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332.ORCID 0000-0002-5265-2559
Georgia Institute of Technology · US

Funding

Uncovering the Architecture of MetacognitionR01MH119189 · NIMH · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI RAHNEV, DOBROMIR · 2020 to 2024
$1.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH119189
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Threat cues have been widely shown to elicit increased sensory and attentional neural processing. However, whether this enhanced recruitment leads to measurable behavioral improvements in perception is still in question. Here, we adjudicate between two opposing theories: that threat cues do or do not enhance perceptual sensitivity. We created threat stimuli by pairing one direction of motion in a random dot kinematogram with an aversive sound. While in the MRI scanner, 46 subjects (both men and women) completed a cued (threat/safe/neutral) perceptual decision-making task where they indicated the perceived motion direction of each moving dot stimulus. We found strong evidence that threat cues did not increase perceptual sensitivity compared with safe and neutral cues. This lack of improvement in perceptual decision-making ability occurred despite the threat cue resulting in widespread increases in frontoparietal BOLD activity, as well as increased connectivity between the right insula and the frontoparietal network. These results call into question the intuitive claim that expectation automatically enhances our perception of threat and highlight the role of the frontoparietal network in prioritizing the processing of threat-related environmental cues.

Indexed as

AttentionMotivationAffectCuesFemaleHumansMaleclassical/pavlovian conditioningexpectationfMRIfrontoparietal networkperceptual decision-makingthreat perception

Identifiers

PMID38395615
PMCPMC11007364
OpenAlexW4392094216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.