Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39918895›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2025

EEG Decoding of Conscious versus Unconscious Representations during Binocular Rivalry.

Lara C Krisst, Steven J Luck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Lara C KrisstCalifornia Institute of Technology.
Steven J LuckUniversity of California.ORCID 0000-0002-3725-1474

Funding

Visual Working Memory: Representation and ProcessR01MH076226 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI LUCK, STEVEN J · 2006 to 2020
$4.5M
NIH HHS R01MH0762262SJLNIMH NIH HHS R01 MH076226
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theories of visual awareness often fall into two general categories, those assuming that awareness arises rapidly within visual cortex and those assuming that awareness arises more slowly as a result of interactions between visual cortex and frontoparietal regions. To test the plausibility of early theories of consciousness, we combined the temporal resolution of the EEG technique with multivariate pattern classification techniques to assess the latency at which decodable information about consciously perceived stimuli is enhanced relative to information about stimuli that are not consciously perceived. Competing red and green gratings were presented simultaneously to the two eyes, creating rivalry, and observers reported which one of the two colors was perceived on each trial. We then used the pattern of EEG over the scalp to decode the orientation of the grating that was perceived and the orientation of the grating that was suppressed by the rivalry and not perceived. This allowed us to determine when the content of the neural representations differed between the consciously perceived grating and the unconscious grating. Early theories predict that the difference between conscious and unconscious processing would occur within ∼200 msec of stimulus onset (e.g., at the time of the visual awareness negativity). We found that decoding accuracy was significantly greater for the consciously perceived orientation than for the unperceived orientation beginning 160 msec after stimulus onset, as predicted by theories that propose a rapid onset of visual awareness.

Identifiers

PMID39918895
PMCPMC12325685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.