EEG Hemispheric Asymmetries during Cognitive Tasks in Depressed Patients with High versus Low Trait Anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of regional hemispheric asymmetries point to relatively less activity in left frontal and right posterior regions in depression. Anxiety was associated with increased right posterior activity, which may be related to arousal and, in anxious-depressed individuals, offset the posterior asymmetry typically seen in depression. These asymmetries have been indexed by resting EEG or inferred through the use of lateralized auditory and visual tasks (e.g., dichotic listening and chimeric faces). However, associations between regional EEG activity and neurocognitive function in depression or anxiety remain unclear. The present study used matched verbal (Word Finding) and spatial (Dot Localization) tasks to compare task-related alpha asymmetries in depressed patients grouped according to level of trait anxiety. EEG and behavioral performance were recorded from depressed patients with high anxiety (n = 14) or low anxiety (n = 14) and 21 age- and education-matched healthy adults during the two tasks, and alpha power was averaged within each task. As predicted, the two patient groups exhibited opposite patterns of regional hemispheric alpha asymmetry. Greater right than left central-parietal activation was seen in the high-anxiety depressed group during the spatial task, whereas greater left than right frontal-central activation was found in the low-anxiety depressed group during the verbal task. Group differences in task performance were in the expected direction but did not reach statistical significance. These results are consistent with Heller's two-dimensional model of depression and anxiety and highlight the sensitivity of task-related EEG alpha in discriminating among subgroups of depressed patients differing in trait anxiety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".