ArticleExperimental brain research2014
Revisiting the association between hypnotisability and blink rate.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High Hypnotizability Impairs the Cerebellar Control of Pain.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2017Article
- Article
- Hypnotizability and Performance on a Prism Adaptation Test.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blink rate (BR), which is considered an index of the dopaminergic tone, has been studied in 41 subjects with high (highs), medium (mediums) and low (lows) hypnotisability scores in resting conditions. It has been found higher in highs; relaxation (indicated by skin conductance), anxiety and the proneness to absorption in tasks (assessed by questionnaires) were not responsible for the observed difference. In contrast, the BR difference did not survive controlling for mind wandering (MW questionnaire) whose variability could account for contrasting earlier reports, although no significant hypnotisability-related difference has been observed in MW scores. Findings do not allow to exclude that mechanisms other than dopaminergic ones may be involved in the observed difference in BR. In particular, we suggest that one of the mechanisms possibly sustaining the highs' higher BR may be a reduced cerebellar inhibition. In fact, cerebellar impairment is associated with higher BR and several studies of sensorimotor integration indicate different cerebellar controls in the highs' and lows' behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25138913What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.