Inhibition in the face of emotion: Characterization of the spatial‐temporal dynamics that facilitate automatic emotion regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotion regulation mediates socio-cognitive functions and is essential for interactions with others. The capacity to automatically inhibit responses to emotional stimuli is an important aspect of emotion regulation; the underlying neural mechanisms of this ability have been rarely investigated. Forty adults completed a Go/No-go task during magnetoencephalographic (MEG) recordings, where they responded rapidly to either a blue or purple frame which contained angry or happy faces. Subjects responded to the target color in an inhibition (75% Go trials) and a vigilance condition (25% Go trials). As expected, inhibition processes showed early, sustained activation (200-450 ms) in the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG). Emotion-related inhibition processes showed greater activity with angry faces bilaterally in the orbital-frontal gyri (OFG) starting at 225 ms and temporal poles from 250 ms, with right hemisphere dominance. The presence of happy faces elicited earlier activity in the right OFG. This study demonstrates that the timing of inhibition processes varies with the emotional context and that there is much greater activation in the presence of angry faces. It underscores the importance of the right IFG for inhibition processes, but the OFG in automatic emotion regulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".