Emotional state as a modulator of autonomic and somatic nervous system activity in postural control: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in our understanding of postural control have highlighted the need to examine the influence of higher brain centers in the modulation of this complex function. There is strong evidence of a link between emotional state, autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity and somatic nervous system (somatic NS) activity in postural control. For example, relationships have been demonstrated between postural threat, anxiety, fear of falling, balance confidence, and physiological arousal. Behaviorally, increased arousal has been associated with changes in velocity and amplitude of postural sway during quiet standing. The potential links between ANS and somatic NS, observed in control of posture, are associated with shared neuroanatomical connections within the central nervous system (CNS). The influence of emotional state on postural control likely reflects the important influence the limbic system has on these ANS/somatic NS control networks. This narrative review will highlight several examples of behaviors which routinely require coordination between the ANS and somatic NS, highlighting the importance of the neurofunctional link between these systems. Furthermore, we will extend beyond the more historical focus on threat models and examine how disordered/altered emotional state and ANS processing may influence postural control and assessment. Finally, this paper will discuss studies that have been important in uncovering the modulatory effect of emotional state on postural control including links that may inform our understanding of disordered control, such as that observed in individuals living with Parkinson's disease and discuss methodological tools that have the potential to advance understanding of this complex relationship.
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) | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".