ArticleNeuroscience of consciousness2025
Computational modelling shows evidence in support of both sensory and frontal theories of consciousness.
Article in Neuroscience of consciousness, 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.
- Consciousness in the Brain: An Integrative Review of Contemporary Theories.Brain sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) in consciousness is hotly debated. Frontal theories argue that the PFC is necessary for consciousness, while sensory theories propose that consciousness arises from recurrent activity in the posterior cortex alone, with activity in the PFC resulting from the mere act of reporting. To resolve this dispute, we re-analysed an electroencephalography (EEG) dataset of 30 participants from a no-report inattentional blindness paradigm where faces are (un)consciously perceived. We performed source reconstruction on the EEG data to first establish the robustly active regions, which were then used to build the networks in the dynamic causal modelling analysis. Dynamic causal modelling was used to estimate the effective connectivity between the key contended brain regions, the prefrontal and the posterior cortices. Then, a second-level parametric empirical Bayesian model was conducted to determine how connectivity was modulated by awareness and task-relevance. While an initial data-driven search could not corroborate neither sensory nor frontal theories of consciousness, a more directed hypothesis-driven analysis revealed strong evidence that both theories could explain the data, with a very slight preference for frontal theories. Specifically, a model with backward connections switched off within the posterior cortex explained awareness better (53%) than a model without backward connections from the PFC to sensory regions. Our findings provide some support for a subtle, yet crucial, contribution of the frontal cortex in consciousness, and highlight the need to revise current theories of consciousness.
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.