ArticleScientific reports2026
Cognitive control networks causally support implicit emotion regulation: evidence from dlPFC stimulation and directed functional connectivity.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cognitive control networks support adaptive regulation of behavior and affect, yet their role in automatic forms of emotion regulation remains poorly understood. Here, we tested whether large-scale cognitive control networks causally support implicit emotion regulation, using a within-subject design combining offline inhibitory transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), EEG-based directed connectivity analyses, and a self-control priming paradigm. Across three sessions (sham, left cathodal, right cathodal), thirty-five female participants passively viewed negative and neutral images under implicit regulation or no regulation conditions. In the sham session, implicit regulation was associated with reduced indices of emotional processing, reflected in attenuated Late Positive Potential (LPP) amplitudes and modulation of prestimulus alpha activity in the visual cortex, indicating modulation of anticipatory and sustained processing stages. These sham-associated neural effects were attenuated (LPP) or altered (prestimulus alpha activity) following inhibitory dlPFC stimulation. Directed connectivity analyses further revealed tDCS-induced alterations in within-network frontoparietal and cingulo-opercular connectivity and cross-network interactions between frontoparietal and visual systems in the theta (3-7 Hz) and beta (15-30 Hz) bands. Together, these findings suggest that implicit regulation recruits large-scale cognitive control networks, with the dlPFC acting as a hub for dynamic coordination between executive and visual systems. Contrary to models that view implicit emotion regulation as independent of executive control, these results indicate that automatic regulatory processes depend on intact top-down control and frequency-specific communication across networks.
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.