Involvement of the primary motor cortex in the early processing stage of the affective stimulus-response compatibility effect in a manikin task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compatible (positive approaching and negative avoiding) and incompatible (positive avoiding and negative approaching) behavior are of great significance for biological adaptation and survival. Previous research has found that reaction times of compatible behavior are shorter than the incompatible behavior, which is termed the stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect. However, the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms of the SRC effect applied to affective stimuli is still unclear. Here, we investigated preparatory activities in both the left and right primary motor cortex (M1) before the execution of an approaching-avoiding behavior using the right index finger in a manikin task based on self-identity. The results showed significantly shorter reaction times for compatible than incompatible behavior. Most importantly, motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes from left M1 stimulation were significantly higher during compatible behavior than incompatible behavior at 150 and 200 ms after stimulus presentation, whereas the reversed was observed for right M1 stimulation with lower MEP amplitude in compatible compared to incompatible behavior at 150 ms. The current findings revealed the compatibility effect at both behavioral and neurophysiological levels, indicating that the affective SRC effect occurs early in the motor cortices during stimulus processing, and MEP modulation at this early processing stage could be a physiological marker of the affective SRC effect.
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".