Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37557971›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2023

Specialized late cingulo-opercular network activation elucidates the mechanisms underlying decisions about ambiguity.

Jordan E Pierce, Nathan M Petro, Elizabeth Clancy, Caterina Gratton, Steven E Petersen, Maital Neta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Facing ambiguity: What we do in the space between stimulus and response.Current directions in psychological science · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Oscillatory brain dynamics underlying affective face processing.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jordan E PierceCenter for Brain, Biology, and Behavior, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA. Electronic address: jpierce14@unl.edu.
Nathan M PetroInstitute for Human Neuroscience, Boys Town National Research Hospital, Boys Town, NE, USA; Center for Pediatric Brain Health, Boys Town National Research Hospital, Boys Town, NE, USA.
Elizabeth ClancyDepartment of Psychology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Caterina GrattonDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Steven E PetersenDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Maital NetaCenter for Brain, Biology, and Behavior, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA.
University of Nebraska–Lincoln · USBoys Town · USFlorida State University · USUniversity of Guelph · CAWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Functional Brain Networks Mediating Individual Differences in Valence BiasR01MH111640 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI NETA, MAITAL · 2017 to 2022
$1.8M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111640
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cortical task control networks, including the cingulo-opercular (CO) network play a key role in decision-making across a variety of functional domains. In particular, the CO network functions in a performance reporting capacity that supports successful task performance, especially in response to errors and ambiguity. In two studies testing the contribution of the CO network to ambiguity processing, we presented a valence bias task in which masked clearly and ambiguously valenced emotional expressions were slowly revealed over several seconds. This slow reveal task design provides a window into the decision-making mechanisms as they unfold over the course of a trial. In the main study, the slow reveal task was administered to 32 young adults in the fMRI environment and BOLD time courses were extracted from regions of interest in three control networks. In a follow-up study, the task was administered to a larger, online sample (n = 81) using a more extended slow reveal design with additional unmasking frames. Positive judgments of surprised faces were uniquely accompanied by slower response times and strong, late activation in the CO network. These results support the initial negativity hypothesis, which posits that the default response to ambiguity is negative and positive judgments are associated with a more effortful controlled process, and additionally suggest that this controlled process is mediated by the CO network. Moreover, ambiguous trials were characterized by a second CO response at the end of the trial, firmly placing CO function late in the decision-making process.

Indexed as

Brain MappingJudgmentFollow-Up StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReaction TimeYoung AdultAmbiguityCingulo-opercular networkDecision-makingEmotionfMRI

Identifiers

PMID37557971
PMCPMC10528723
OpenAlexW4385617427

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.