ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025
Modulation of perception by emotion: Altered sensitivity and perceived magnitude of negatively valenced stimuli.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2025. 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.
- Emotional Context Modulates Neural Prediction-Error Encoding.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Emotional modulation of visual processing is observed across various domains of perception. We examined whether these modulations affect perceptual sensitivity, the perceived magnitude (biases) of visual stimuli, or both. We asked participants to reproduce the duration (Exp. 1) and size (Exp. 2) of threat-related stimuli (spiders), and those of neutral ones (2D disks and butterflies). Sensitivity was examined by measuring within-subject standard deviations of reproductions for varying magnitudes of the stimuli. Biases were examined by measuring regression to the-mean, a tendency of subjective estimates to gravitate toward the center of the distribution from which stimuli were sampled. Results showed a mild increase in the standard deviations of reproductions of larger magnitudes for negatively valenced stimuli, indicating lower sensitivity. While regression biases were overall observed for these stimuli, biases decreased for the higher levels of intensities, despite their lower sensitivity. Underestimation of above-mean magnitudes was relatively moderated, demonstrating altered relations between the reliability of the sensory input and perceptual biases for these stimuli. Overall, the results suggest that magnitude perception is biased toward the central tendency of the experienced stimuli, even for threatening stimuli; however, biases are milder for the intensified values, presumably to obtain more veridical perception of these stimuli.
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.