Background luminance effects on pupil size associated with emotion and saccade preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pupil dilation is consistently evoked by affective and cognitive processing, and this dilation can result from sympathetic activation or parasympathetic inhibition. The relative contributions of the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems on the pupillary response induced by emotion and cognition may be different. Sympathetic and parasympathetic activity is regulated by global luminance level. Higher luminance levels lead to greater activation of the parasympathetic system while lower luminance levels lead to greater activation of the sympathetic system. To understand the contributions of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems to pupillary responses associated with emotion and saccade preparation, emotional auditory stimuli were presented following the fixation cue whose color indicated instruction to perform a pro- or anti-saccade while varying the background luminance level. Pupil dilation was evoked by emotional auditory stimuli and modulated by arousal level. More importantly, greater pupil dilation was observed with a dark background, compared to a bright background. In contrast, pupil dilation responses associated with saccade preparation were larger with the bright background than the dark background. Together, these results suggest that arousal-induced pupil dilation was mainly mediated by sympathetic activation, but pupil dilation related to saccade preparation was primarily mediated by parasympathetic inhibition.
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) | 0.003 | 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".