EXPRESS:验证疼痛感知中上升信号精度的测量方法。

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Aadya Singh, Roi Treister, Christiana Charalambous, Flavia Mancini, Deborah Talmi
{"title":"EXPRESS:验证疼痛感知中上升信号精度的测量方法。","authors":"Aadya Singh, Roi Treister, Christiana Charalambous, Flavia Mancini, Deborah Talmi","doi":"10.1177/17470218251343863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pain perception can be described as a process of Bayesian inference, which generates sensory estimates based on prior expectations and afferent information. The inference is affected by within-individual variations in the precision (inverse variance) of the distribution of centrally-predicted ascending noxious signals. While the top-down effect of priors (expectations and beliefs) on pain perception has received much attention within the Bayesian framework, there remains a lack of validated quantitative measures that capture within-individual variations in the likelihood function. Using a 2x2 fully factorial within-individual design, we measured and compared the precision of the likelihood function in four tasks administered to 57 healthy adults: the cued-pain task (CPT) and the Focused Analgesia Selection Test (FAST), in two noxious modalities, thermal and electrical. A hierarchical Bayesian model was applied to the CPT, and the FAST was employed as a validation criterion, given that it is known to correlate with clinical pain reports and the placebo response. Individuals with a more precise representation of ascending sensory signals in the cued-pain task produced less variable pain reports in the FAST. We validated the result by replicating this correlation across thermal and electrical pain. These results support the validity of our approach to the measurement of precision of ascending noxious signals. Their correlation with FAST scores supports their criterion validity and their correlation across noxious sub-modalities support the concurrent validity of this measurement. Quantifying the precision of noxious inputs could inform work on placebo sensitivity and strengthen the assay sensitivity of randomised clinical trials involving pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218251343863"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EXPRESS: Validating a measure of the precision of ascending signals in pain perception.\",\"authors\":\"Aadya Singh, Roi Treister, Christiana Charalambous, Flavia Mancini, Deborah Talmi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218251343863\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pain perception can be described as a process of Bayesian inference, which generates sensory estimates based on prior expectations and afferent information. The inference is affected by within-individual variations in the precision (inverse variance) of the distribution of centrally-predicted ascending noxious signals. While the top-down effect of priors (expectations and beliefs) on pain perception has received much attention within the Bayesian framework, there remains a lack of validated quantitative measures that capture within-individual variations in the likelihood function. Using a 2x2 fully factorial within-individual design, we measured and compared the precision of the likelihood function in four tasks administered to 57 healthy adults: the cued-pain task (CPT) and the Focused Analgesia Selection Test (FAST), in two noxious modalities, thermal and electrical. A hierarchical Bayesian model was applied to the CPT, and the FAST was employed as a validation criterion, given that it is known to correlate with clinical pain reports and the placebo response. Individuals with a more precise representation of ascending sensory signals in the cued-pain task produced less variable pain reports in the FAST. We validated the result by replicating this correlation across thermal and electrical pain. These results support the validity of our approach to the measurement of precision of ascending noxious signals. Their correlation with FAST scores supports their criterion validity and their correlation across noxious sub-modalities support the concurrent validity of this measurement. Quantifying the precision of noxious inputs could inform work on placebo sensitivity and strengthen the assay sensitivity of randomised clinical trials involving pain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17470218251343863\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218251343863\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218251343863","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

疼痛感知可以被描述为一个贝叶斯推理过程,该过程基于先验期望和传入信息产生感官估计。该推断受集中预测的上行有害信号分布的精度(方差逆)的个体内变化的影响。虽然先验(期望和信念)对疼痛感知的自上而下的影响在贝叶斯框架内受到了很多关注,但仍然缺乏有效的定量措施来捕捉似然函数的个体内部变化。采用2x2全因子个体内设计,我们测量并比较了57名健康成人在四项任务中的似然函数的精度:提示疼痛任务(CPT)和集中镇痛选择测试(FAST),两种毒性模式,热和电。分层贝叶斯模型应用于CPT, FAST被用作验证标准,因为已知它与临床疼痛报告和安慰剂反应相关。在提示疼痛任务中,对上升感觉信号表现更精确的个体在FAST中产生的可变疼痛报告较少。我们通过在热痛和电痛中复制这种相关性来验证结果。这些结果支持了我们测量上升有害信号精度的方法的有效性。它们与FAST评分的相关性支持其标准效度,它们在有害子模态之间的相关性支持该测量的并发效度。量化有害输入的准确性可以为安慰剂敏感性研究提供信息,并加强涉及疼痛的随机临床试验的检测灵敏度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EXPRESS: Validating a measure of the precision of ascending signals in pain perception.

Pain perception can be described as a process of Bayesian inference, which generates sensory estimates based on prior expectations and afferent information. The inference is affected by within-individual variations in the precision (inverse variance) of the distribution of centrally-predicted ascending noxious signals. While the top-down effect of priors (expectations and beliefs) on pain perception has received much attention within the Bayesian framework, there remains a lack of validated quantitative measures that capture within-individual variations in the likelihood function. Using a 2x2 fully factorial within-individual design, we measured and compared the precision of the likelihood function in four tasks administered to 57 healthy adults: the cued-pain task (CPT) and the Focused Analgesia Selection Test (FAST), in two noxious modalities, thermal and electrical. A hierarchical Bayesian model was applied to the CPT, and the FAST was employed as a validation criterion, given that it is known to correlate with clinical pain reports and the placebo response. Individuals with a more precise representation of ascending sensory signals in the cued-pain task produced less variable pain reports in the FAST. We validated the result by replicating this correlation across thermal and electrical pain. These results support the validity of our approach to the measurement of precision of ascending noxious signals. Their correlation with FAST scores supports their criterion validity and their correlation across noxious sub-modalities support the concurrent validity of this measurement. Quantifying the precision of noxious inputs could inform work on placebo sensitivity and strengthen the assay sensitivity of randomised clinical trials involving pain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信