Back

Temporal contrast enhancement generalizes across pain and auditory modalities

Poehlmann, J.; Szikszay, T. M.; Luebke, L.; Adamczyk, W. M.; Luedtke, K.; Wöstmann, M.

2025-12-17 neuroscience
10.64898/2025.12.16.694610 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Temporal contrast enhancement (TCE), also termed offset analgesia, describes a temporal filtering mechanism whereby a small contrast in stimulus intensity produces a disproportionately large reduction in perceived pain. Although TCE is considered a robust marker of endogenous pain modulation, its underlying mechanisms remain unresolved. It is unclear whether TCE reflects a nociceptive-specific modulatory process or a supramodal temporal filtering mechanism that generalizes to non-painful but aversive sensory stimulation. In this study, healthy and pain-free participants were enrolled in two experiments: a behavioral study (n=33) or a neurophysiological study (n=29). Continuous pain-ratings, electroencephalography (EEG) and pupillometry data were collected. A conventional TCE paradigm was applied using either noxious heat delivered via a thermal contact stimulator or unpleasant auditory stimulation delivered through over-ear headphones. Both noxious heat and unpleasant sounds induced behavioral TCE-effects (p<0.01), indicating a supramodal mechanism with modality-specific temporal dynamics. In the second experiment, noxious heat resulted in decreased power of neural alpha oscillations ([~]10 Hz, p<0.05) and increased pupil size (p<0.05) potentially indicating bottom-up modulation of the autonomic nervous system and a release of neural inhibition, respectively. However, subjectively experienced TCE-effects were not represented in neurophysiological correlates. These findings support TCE as a supramodal temporal filtering mechanism characterized by modality-specific temporal dynamics, for which no corresponding signatures are found in EEG or pupillometry.

Published in Pain (predicted rank #1) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.