ArticleBrain sciences2024
Independence Threat or Interdependence Threat? The Focusing Effect on Social or Physical Threat Modulates Brain Activity.
Article in Brain sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe neural basis of threat perception has mostly been examined separately for social or physical threats. However, most of the threats encountered in everyday life are complex. The features of interactions between social and physiological threats under different attentional conditions are unclear.
methodThe present study explores this issue using an attention-guided paradigm based on ERP techniques. The screen displays social threats (face threats) and physical threats (action threats), instructing participants to concentrate on only one type of threat, thereby exploring brain activation characteristics.
resultsIt was found that action threats did not affect the processing of face threats in the face-attention condition, and electrophysiological evidence from the brain suggests a comparable situation to that when processing face threats alone, with higher amplitudes of the N170 and EPN (Early Posterior Negativity) components of anger than neutral emotions. However, when focusing on the action-attention condition, the brain was affected by face threats, as evidenced by a greater N190 elicited by stimuli containing threatening emotions, regardless of whether the action was threatening or not. This trend was also reflected in EPN.
conclusionsThe current study reveals important similarities and differences between physical and social threats, suggesting that the brain has a greater processing advantage for social threats.
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.