Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38489302›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Orientation and contrast deviance examined: Contrast effects mimic deviant-related negativity yet neither produce the canonical neural correlate of prediction error.

Alie G Male

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

1 author.

Alie G MaleDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, School of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1247-2577

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) is a negative-going event-related potential (ERP) component that is largest somewhere between 100 and 300 ms after the onset of an unpredictable visual event (i.e., a deviant) in an otherwise predictable sequence of visual events (i.e., standards). Many have argued that the vMMN allows us to monitor our ever-changing visual environment for deviants critical to our survival. Recently, however, it has become unclear whether unpredicted changes in low-level features of visual input, like orientation, can evoke the vMMN. I address this by testing isolated orientation changes, to confirm recent findings, and isolated contrast changes, to determine whether other low-level features of visual input do not evoke the vMMN in a traditional oddball paradigm. Eighteen participants saw sequences of rare, unanticipated, and different deviant stimuli, interspersed among frequent, anticipated, and identical standard stimuli. Stimuli were Gabor patches. Neither deviant produced a vMMN. Therefore, changes in low-level visual properties of well-controlled stimuli-a stimulus in which one property can be manipulated while all others remain unaffected-like Gabor patches do not yield a vMMN.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyVisual PerceptionEvoked PotentialsEvoked Potentials, VisualHumansPhotic StimulationReference Standards

Identifiers

PMID38489302
PMCPMC10942059

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.