Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40555083›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2025

Multivariate neural markers of individual differences in thought control difficulties.

Jacob DeRosa, Harry R Smolker, Hyojeong Kim, Boman Groff, Jarrod Lewis-Peacock, Marie T Banich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jacob DeRosaDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, USA; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA. Electronic address: jacob.derosa@colorado.edu.
Harry R SmolkerInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA.
Hyojeong KimDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Boman GroffDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, USA; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA.
Jarrod Lewis-PeacockDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Marie T BanichDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, USA; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, USA.

Funding

Neural and Cognitive Mechanisms for Removing Emotional Information from Working MemoryR01MH129042 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI BANICH, MARIE T, LEWIS-PEACOCK, JARROD A · 2022 to 2025
$3.0M
Removing and Manipulating Emotional Information in Working Memory: Cognitive and Neural RepresentationsR56MH125642 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI BANICH, MARIE T, LEWIS-PEACOCK, JARROD A · 2021 to 2021
$770k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH129042NIMH NIH HHS R56 MH125642
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study identified specific patterns of brain activity distributed within and across four different brain networks associated with an individual's difficulties in controlling thoughts, a transdiagnostic feature of mental health disorders. Previously, we demonstrated that four working memory control operations-maintaining, replacing, suppressing, and clearing thoughts-are represented by distinct multi-voxel patterns of brain activation. Moreover, the exact pattern that characterizes these operations is distinct across four sets of brain regions, referred to as working memory operation networks, that include a Visual Network (VN), Somatomotor Network (SMN), Default Mode Network (DMN), and Frontoparietal Control Network (FPCN). The current study examined the hypothesis that aspects of these multi-voxel patterns are associated with an individual's difficulty in controlling thoughts, as derived from a composite of three self-report questionnaires, in a non-clinical (N = 48) sample. Consistent with our hypothesis, three effects were observed. Individuals with higher levels of thought-control difficulty have less distinct multi-voxel patterns for each of the four operations, have a less distinct representation of the suppression and clear operations in the DMN network from its representations in other networks, and have a more variable representation of multiple operations within each of the FPCN, VN and SMN networks. These neural patterns accounted for over 30 % of the variance in self-reported thought difficulties. Moreover, these associations were specific to working memory operations as they were not observed at rest, highlighting their relevance for understanding the neural mechanisms of repetitive negative thinking and their potential as biomarkers for interventions targeting impaired thought control.

Indexed as

BrainIndividualityMemory, Short-TermNerve NetThinkingAdolescentAdultBrain MappingDefault Mode NetworkFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleYoung AdultCognitive controlCortical gradientsDefault mode networkFrontoparietal networkFunctional connectivityIndividual differencesMulti-voxel pattern analysisRepresentational similarity analysisWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID40555083
PMCPMC12242441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.