Neurophysiological traces of interpersonal pain: How emotional autobiographical memories affect event-related potentials.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The automatic, involuntary reactivation of disturbing emotional memories, for example, of interpersonal pain, causes psychological discomfort and is central to many psychopathologies. This study aimed at elucidating the automatic brain processes underlying emotional autobiographical memories by investigating the neurophysiological dynamics within the first second after memory reactivation. Pictures of different individualized familiar faces served as cues for different specific emotional autobiographical memories, for example, for memories of interpersonal pain and grievances or for memories of appreciation in interpersonal relationships. Nineteen subjects participated in a passive face-viewing task while multichannel electroencephalogram was recorded. Analyses of event-related potentials demonstrated that emotional memories elicited an early posterior negativity and a stronger late positive potential, which tended to be particularly enhanced for painful memories. Source estimations attributed this stronger activation to networks including the posterior cingulate and ventrolateral prefrontal cortices. The findings suggest that the reactivation of emotional autobiographical memories involves privileged automatic attention at perceptual processing stages, and an enhanced recruitment of neural network activity at a postperceptual stage sensitive to emotional-motivational processing. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".