Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39292714›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Effects of acute stress on biological motion perception.

Jifu Wang, Fang Shi, Lin Yu

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Jifu WangCollege of Education and Physical Education, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Fang ShiCollege of Education and Physical Education, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Lin YuNeurocognition and Action-Biomechanics Research Group, Faculty of Psychology and Sports Science, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9136-2733

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biological motion perception is an essential part of the cognitive process. Stress can affect the cognitive process. The present study explored the intrinsic ERP features of the effects of acute psychological stress on biological motion perception. The results contributed scientific evidence for the adaptive behavior changes under acute stress. After a mental arithmetic task was used to induce stress, the paradigm of point-light displays was used to evaluate biological motion perception. Longer reaction time and lower accuracy were found in the inverted walking condition than in the upright walking condition, which was called the "inversion effect". The P2 peak amplitude and the LPP mean amplitude were significantly higher in the local inverted perception than in the local upright walking condition. Compared to the control condition, the stress condition induced lower RT, shorter P1 peak latency of biological motion perception, lower P2 peak amplitude and LPP mean amplitude, and higher N330 peak amplitude. There was an "inversion effect" in biological motion perception. This effect was related to the structural characteristics of biological motion perception but unrelated to the state of acute psychological stress. Acute psychological stress accelerated the reaction time and enhanced attention control of biological motion perception. Attention resources were used earlier, and less attentional investment was made in the early stage of biological motion perception processing. In the late stage, a continuous weakening of inhibition was shown in the parieto-occipital area.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionReaction TimeStress, PsychologicalAdultAttentionElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansMaleWalkingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39292714
PMCPMC11410201

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.