ReviewCerebellum (London, England)2022
Hypnotisability and the Cerebellum: Hypotheses and Perspectives.
Review in Cerebellum (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study on the effects of visual status on walking-related brain functions in healthy young adults.Chinese medical journal · 2026Article
- Words hurt: common and distinct neural substrates underlying nociceptive and semantic pain.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypnotisability is a multidimensional trait predicting the proneness to enter hypnosis and/or accept suggestions and is associated with several psychophysiological correlates. This scoping review reports the differences between individuals with high (highs) and low hypnotizability (lows) in the left cerebellar lobules IV-VI grey matter volume, in the excitability of the right motor cortex and in motor and non-motor functions in which the cerebellum may be involved. A reduced cerebellar inhibition may explain the greater excitability of the highs' right motor cortex. The latter may be involved in their greater proneness to ideomotor behaviour following sensorimotor suggestions. The associated experience of involuntariness and effortlessness could be due to the motor cortex greater excitability as well as to activation of a specific cerebellar-parietal circuit. Looser postural and visuomotor control with no learning across trials and greater attentional stability can be accounted for by a less accurate cerebellar predictive model of information processing. The highs' stronger functional equivalence between imagery and perception/action and greater motor excitability may be involved in the highs' greater proneness to respond to emotional stimuli. Paradoxical pain control may depend on reduced cortical inhibition of the pain matrix by the cerebellum. Cerebellar hypotheses are not alternative to other physiological mechanisms and should be tested in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.