MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236344058 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/h7jfe

The Effects of Acute Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Attentional Bias in Pedophilic Disorder: A Pre-registered Pilot Study

2019· preprint· en· W4236344058 on OpenAlexaff
Patrizia Pezzoli, Anastasios Ziogas, Michael C. Seto, Natalia Jaworska, Andreas Mokros, Paul Fedoroff, Pekka Santtila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttentional biasTranscranial direct-current stimulationAudiologyDorsolateral prefrontal cortexPsychologyFacilitationArousalSalience (neuroscience)Stroop effectPrefrontal cortexCognitionNeuroscienceDevelopmental psychologyStimulationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. Individuals with Pedophilic Disorder (PD) experience personal andinterpersonal difficulties and are at risk of sexually offending against children. As such, innovative and empirically validated treatments are needed. Recent studies have indicated that men who have sexually offended against children (SOC) with PD display an automatic attention bias for child-related stimuli as well as reduced activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), a brain area involved in cognitive control, including control over sexual arousal. In this pre-registered pilot study, we are the first to investigate whether acutely increasing prefrontal activity could reduce the putative pedophilic attention bias. Materials and Methods. We delivered a single 20-minute session of active anodal vs. sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left dlPFC to 16 SOC with PD and 16 matched healthy controls, while they performed a task requiring controlled attention to computer-generated images of clothed and nude children and adults. We collected responses unobtrusively by recording eye movements. Results. Our results did not support the presence of the expected automatic attention bias across outcome measures. Nonetheless, we found a response facilitation with child targets in patients and, unexpectedly, in controls, likely due to unwanted salience effects. Active vs. sham tDCS reduced this bias across groups, as indicated by a significant group*condition interaction (p = .04). However, no attentional bias and no tDCS effects on attentional responses to child and adult images emerged following tDCS. Conclusions. These results suggest enhanced cognitive control in response to salient stimuli during active tDCS. Thus, to assist future studies on neuromodulation in PD, we provide suggestions for design improvement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.224
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies→French-language works237,207→