ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Negation and social avoidance in language recruits the right inferior frontal gyrus: a tDCS study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In the process of comprehension, linguistic negation induces inhibition of negated scenarios. Numerous studies have highlighted the role of the right Inferior Frontal Gyrus (rIFG) - a key component of the inhibitory network - in negation processing. Social avoidance can be linguistically portrayed using attitudinal verbs such as "exclude" vs. "include", which inherently carry negative connotations. Consequently, we hypothesize that the interplay between explicit negation and the implicit negativity of avoidance verbs can be modulated via transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting the rIFG. Methods: In our study, sixty-four participants read approach/avoidance sentences, which were either affirmative or negative, such as "Anne included (did not include) meat in her diet" vs. "Anne excluded (did not exclude) meat in her diet". This reading task followed a 20-minute tDCS session. The sentences were sequentially displayed, and at 1500 ms post-sentence, a verb was shown - either the one previously mentioned or its semantic alternative counterpart (e.g., included vs. excluded). Results: Findings revealed that anodal stimulation intensifies the inhibitory impact of negation during sentence comprehension. Under anodal conditions, negative sentences led to extended reading times for the mentioned verbs compared to their affirmative counterparts, suggesting an increased inhibitory effect on the verb. Furthermore, in avoidance sentences, anodal stimulation resulted in reduced reading times for alternative verbs (e.g. "included") in negative sentences compared to alternative verbs (e.g. "excluded") in negated approach sentences. Discussion: As "avoidance" is semantically equivalent to "non-approach", the inhibitory effect of negation is primarily applied to the implicit negation: NOT EXCLUDED = NOT→NOT (INCLUDED), which consequently activates the representation of the alternative verb making it more available. We further discuss these findings in light of the rIFG's pivotal role in processing attitudinal verbs and linguistic negation. This discussion is framed within the overarching context of the two-step model of negation processing, highlighting its significance in the realm of social communication.
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.