Neural activity of the anterior insula in emotional processing depends on the individuals' emotional susceptibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differences in personality factors between individuals may manifest themselves with different patterns of neural activity while individuals process stimuli with emotional content. We attempted to verify this hypothesis by investigating emotional susceptibility (ES), a specific emotional trait of the human personality defined as the tendency to "experience feelings of discomfort, helplessness, inadequacy and vulnerability" after exposure to stimuli with emotional valence. By administering a questionnaire evaluating the individuals' ES, we selected two groups of participants with high and low ES respectively. Then, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate differences between the groups in the neural activity involved while they were processing emotional stimuli in an explicit (focusing on the content of the stimuli) or an incidental (focusing on spatial features of the stimuli, irrespectively of their content) way. The results showed a selective difference in brain activity between groups only in the explicit processing of the emotional stimuli: bilateral activity of the anterior insula was present in subjects with high ES but not in subjects with low ES. This difference in neural activity within the anterior insula proved to be purely functional since no brain morphological differences were found between groups, as assessed by a voxel-based morphometry analysis. Although the role of the anterior insula in the processing of contexts perceived as emotionally salient is well established, the present study provides the first evidence of a modulation of the insular activity depending on the individuals' ES trait of personality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".