MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164095813 · doi:10.1503/jpn.090094

Multisensory integration of emotionally valenced olfactory–visual information in patients with schizophrenia and healthy controls

2010· article· en· W2164095813 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Janina Seubert, James Loughead, Thilo Kellermann, Frank Boers, Colleen Brensinger, Ute Habel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDisgustFacial expressionOlfactionOdorValence (chemistry)CognitionCategorizationCognitive psychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AudiologyEmotional expressionAffect (linguistics)NeuroscienceAngerClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia frequently have deficits in social cognition, and difficulties in the discrimination of emotional facial expressions have been discussed as an important contributing factor. We investigated whether this impairment is aggravated by difficulties relating the observed facial expression to contextual information, as is often provided by emotionally valenced crossmodal stimulation. METHODS: We investigated the effects of odorant primes on the accuracy and speed of emotional face recognition. Healthy controls and patients with schizophrenia were exposed to 2-second odorant stimuli: vanillin (pleasant), ambient air (neutral) and hydrogen sulfide (unpleasant). The odours were followed by an emotional face recognition task, in which participants determined if a face showed happiness, disgust or neutral affect. RESULTS: Controls showed improved performance in the categorization of disgusted faces after all types of odour stimulation irrespective of the emotional valence. However, in controls, the response time for happy faces was slower after presentation of any odour. Schizophrenia patients showed an attenuated effect of olfactory priming on disgust recognition, which resulted in the increased performance differences between the groups. This effect was particularly strong for the unpleasant odour. LIMITATIONS: The study design did not allow us to fully differentiate between the effects of perceived odour intensity and valence. A possible contribution of cognitive deficits on the observed effects should be investigated in future studies. CONCLUSION: Our results provide novel evidence for a special connection between the presentation of odorant cues and the accuracy of recognition of disgusted faces in healthy controls. This recognition advantage is disturbed in patients with schizophrenia and appears to contribute to the observed deficit in emotional face recognition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations48
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207