Manipulating visual scanpaths during facial emotion perception modulates functional brain activation in schizophrenia patients and controls.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with schizophrenia exhibit deficits in facial emotion processing, which have been associated with abnormalities in visual gaze behavior and functional brain activation. However, the relationship between gaze behavior and brain activation in schizophrenia remains unexamined. Studies in healthy individuals and other clinical samples indicate a relationship between gaze behavior and functional activation in brain regions implicated in facial emotion processing deficits in schizophrenia (e.g., fusiform gyrus), prompting the question of whether a similar relationship exists in schizophrenia. This study examined whether manipulating visual scanpaths during facial emotion perception would modulate functional brain activation in a sample of 23 schizophrenia patients and 26 community controls. Participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) while viewing pictures of emotional faces. During the typical viewing condition, a fixation cue directed participants' gaze primarily to the eyes and mouth, whereas during the atypical viewing condition gaze was directed to peripheral features. Both viewing conditions elicited a robust response throughout face-processing regions. Typical viewing led to greater activation in visual association cortex including the right inferior occipital gyrus/occipital face area, whereas atypical viewing elicited greater activation in primary visual cortex and regions involved in attentional control. There were no between-groups activation differences in response to faces or interaction between group and gaze manipulation. The results indicate that gaze behavior modulates functional activation in early face-processing regions in individuals with and without schizophrenia, suggesting that abnormal gaze behavior in schizophrenia may contribute to activation abnormalities during facial emotion perception. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".