The effect of pain on involuntary and voluntary capture of attention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is converging evidence for the notion that pain affects a broad range of attentional domains. This study investigated the influence of pain on the involuntary capture of attention as indexed by the P3a component in the event-related potential derived from the electroencephalogram. METHODS: Participants performed in an auditory oddball task in a pain-free and a pain condition during which they submerged a hand in cold water. Novel, infrequent and unexpected auditory stimuli were presented randomly in a series of frequent standard and infrequent target tones. P3a and P3b amplitudes were observed to novel, unexpected and target-related stimuli, respectively. RESULTS: Both electrophysiological components were characterized by reduced amplitudes in the pain compared with the pain-free condition. Hit rate and reaction time to target stimuli did not differ between the two conditions presumably because the experimental task was not difficult enough to exceed attentional capacities under pain conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that voluntary attention serving the maintenance and control of ongoing information processing (reflected by the P3b amplitude) is impaired by pain. In addition, the involuntary capture of attention and orientation to novel, unexpected information (measured by the P3a) is also impaired by pain. Thus, neurophysiological measures examined in this study support the theoretical positions proposing that pain can reduce attentional processing capacity. These findings have potentially important implications at the theoretical level for our understanding of the interplay of pain and cognition, and at the therapeutic level for the clinical treatment of individuals experiencing ongoing pain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".