SynthesisBrain and behavior2026
The Neural Blueprint of Novelty: A Meta-Analytic Dissection of Active and Passive Novelty Processing Networks.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Neural Blueprint of Novelty: A Meta-Analytic Dissection of Active and Passive Novelty Processing Networks.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
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
Abstract
backgroundDetecting novel environmental events is a fundamental survival mechanism, enabling organisms to identify and respond to salient changes. This function can operate in at least two broad modes, differing in task demands: active and passive novelty processing. Active processing involves explicitly recognizing novel or deviant stimuli and engaging goal-directed, top-down attentional control and memory-related systems. In contrast, passive processing is driven primarily by bottom-up attentional reorienting and does not necessarily require an explicit response or conscious evaluation. The present study asked whether these two modes recruit a shared neural architecture across task demands.
methodsWe conducted a coordinate-based meta-analysis using Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) across fMRI studies of active and passive novelty processing. Conjunction and subtraction analyses were performed on the resulting ALE maps to identify common and distinct neural substrates associated with each mode of novelty processing.
resultsThe conjunction analysis revealed a core novelty-responsive network encompassing the bilateral medial temporal lobes (MTLs), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and medial frontal regions. Subtraction analyses further identified task-dependent specializations: studies of active novelty processing showed greater spatial convergence in the left precentral gyrus, left IFG, right MTL, and medial frontal areas, whereas studies of passive processing showed greater convergence in the left superior temporal gyrus, bilateral MTL, and right IFG.
conclusionThese findings suggest that active and passive conditions share a common novelty-responsive network but differentially weight its components, reflecting distinct cognitive and attentional demands imposed by the explicit versus incidental processing of novel events.
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.