Neural responses to emotional stimuli across the dissociative spectrum: Common and specific mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Departing from existing neurobiological models of dissociation, the current study aims at conducting a quantitative meta-analytic review of neural responses to emotional stimuli among individuals ascribed to the dissociative spectrum (DS). Accordingly, the study explored common and specific brain mechanisms across borderline personality disorder, conversion/somatoform disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder related to repeated interpersonal traumatic experiences, and dissociative disorders. METHODS: The meta-analysis included studies that administered emotional stimuli during functional magnetic resonance imaging acquisition among individuals included in the DS. There were two conducted meta-analytic procedures: (i) a Bayesian network meta-analysis for a region-of-interest-based approach; and (ii) robust voxel-based approach. RESULTS: Forty-four independent studies were included for a total of 1384 individuals (DS = 741 patients). The network meta-analysis showed specific patterns of neural activity considering an extended brain network involved in emotion regulation for each condition ascribed to the DS. The voxel-based meta-analysis highlighted an increased activity of dorsal anterior cingulate cortex as a common neurological signature of the DS. CONCLUSION: The common neural feature of the DS captures an implicit appraisal of emotion-eliciting stimuli as threatening and/or noxious for mental and physical integrity of the individual together with painful subjective experiences associated with physiological emotional reactions. Specific brain responses across the DS suggested the engagement in different mechanisms to address emotional stimuli, including implicit avoidance reactions and attempts to overcontrol of affective states together with a disruption of integrative processes of emotional mind-body features.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".