MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Is the face-sensitive N170 the only ERP not affected by selective attention?

2000· article· en· W2122309118 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Séverac Cauquil, Gillian E. Edmonds, Margot J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvent-related potentialPsychologyElectroencephalographyNeurophysiologyNeuroscienceLatency (audio)AudiologyFace (sociological concept)ElectrophysiologyCognitive psychologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assessed the effect of directed attention on early neurophysiological indices of face processing, measuring the N170 event-related potential (ERP). Twelve subjects were tested on two tasks each in which they attended either to eyes only or to faces with eyes closed, presented within series of facial and control stimuli. Consistent with the ERP literature, N170 was recorded to facial stimuli at posterior temporal electrodes and a concomitant positive peak at the vertex, with latencies around 150 ms for faces and 174 ms for eyes. However, unlike fMRI studies, neither the latency nor the amplitude of the peaks were sensitive to the target/non-target status of either the eyes or the face stimuli. This suggests that early stages of face processing indexed by N 170 are automatic and unmodified by selective attention.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations140
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207