ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Binocularly suppressed stimuli induce brain activities related to aesthetic emotions.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Aesthetic emotions are a class of emotions aroused by evaluating aesthetically appealing objects or events. While evolutionary aesthetics suggests the adaptive roles of these emotions, empirical assessments are lacking. Previous neuroscientific studies have demonstrated that visual stimuli carrying evolutionarily important information induce neural responses even when presented non-consciously. To examine the evolutionary importance of aesthetic emotions, we conducted a neuroscientific study using magnetoencephalography (MEG) to measure induced neural responses to non-consciously presented portrait paintings categorised as biological and non-biological and examined associations between the induced responses and aesthetic ratings. Methods: MEG and pre-rating data were collected from 23 participants. The pre-rating included visual analogue scales for Results: Behavioural data revealed that saliency scores of non-consciously presented stimuli influenced dichotomic responses (beauty or non-beauty). MEG data showed that non-consciously presented portrait paintings induced spatiotemporally distributed low-frequency brain activities associated with aesthetic ratings, which were distinct between the biological and non-biological categories and conscious and non-conscious conditions. Conclusion: Aesthetic emotion holds evolutionary significance for humans. Neural pathways are sensitive to visual images that arouse aesthetic emotion in distinct ways for biological and non-biological categories, which are further influenced by consciousness. These differences likely reflect the diversity in mechanisms of aesthetic processing, such as processing fluency, active elaboration, and predictive processing. The aesthetic processing of non-conscious stimuli appears to be characterised by fluency-driven affective processing, while top-down regulatory processes are suppressed. This study provides the first empirical evidence supporting the evolutionary significance of aesthetic processing.
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.