ArticleScientific reports2026
Face expectancy cues differentially modulate conflict processing driven by emotional incongruence: an EEG study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adaptive behavior in social interactions requires the effective processing of conflicting emotional information. The impact of expectancy on conflict processing remains a relevant research question. Here we investigated the influence of primed expectancy on conflict processing. To achieve this goal, we used the Emotional Stroop paradigm and variants where expectancy was introduced using facial expression or emotional letter labels. Neurophysiological and behavioral data were collected from 20 healthy participants who completed these three conditions (in the presence or absence of prior expectancy cues). We examined conflict-related components N450 and the Conflict Slow Potential in the classical Emotional Stroop condition and in conditions with manipulated expectancy. When expectancy was introduced, we found a significant effect on conflict processing, with a difference between face and letter emotion cues. Parietal alpha and beta power decreases occurred specifically for face expectancy cues and changed only minimally during conflict, whereas label-based expectancy was associated with less desynchronization during expectancy and a stronger alpha/beta decrease during conflict. These findings suggest that attentional resources are differently prioritized by face versus letter emotion expectancy cues, with face-driven expectancy generating distinctive neurophysiological patterns and a potential facilitation of subsequent conflict resolution.
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.