Differential neural processing of spontaneous blinking under visual and auditory sensory environments: An EEG investigation of blink-related oscillations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blink-related oscillations (BROs) are a recently discovered neurophysiological response associated with spontaneous blinking, distinct from the well-known oculomotor and visual suppression effects. BROs strongly activate the bilateral precuneus along with other cortical regions involved in visuospatial processing and associative episodic memory, and are believed to represent environmental monitoring processes that occur following blink-induced visual interruptions. Although these responses have been reported across multiple imaging modalities under both resting and cognitive loading conditions, it is yet unknown whether these responses also exist under external sensory stimulation conditions. To address this, we investigated BRO responses in healthy adults using 64-channel electroencephalography (EEG), while participants underwent passive external auditory and visual stimulation. Our results showed that BRO responses are present under both auditory and visual stimulation conditions (p < 0.05), with similar temporal and spectral features compared to rest. However, visual stimulation did result in decreased BRO amplitude compared to auditory and resting conditions (p < 0.05), suggesting decreased neuronal resources for processing blink-related information in the visual but not auditory environment. There were also additional pre-blink spectral changes in the visual condition compared to rest (p < 0.05), which suggest that passive visual stimulation induces neural preparatory processes occurring in anticipation of the upcoming blink event. Together, these findings provide new and compelling evidence that blink-related neural processes are modulated not only by the internal cognitive loading due to simultaneous task demands, but also by competing external sensory requirements. This highlights the link between blinking and cognition, and further demonstrates the importance of BROs as a new window into brain function.
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) | 0.001 | 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".