Back

Direction-sensitive neural correlates of voluntary pain regulation: regional response attenuation during down-regulation and exploratory prefrontal-valuation coupling

Kharghani, M.; Gholami, E.

2026-10-08 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.10.01.756083 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Voluntary cognitive regulation can increase or decrease pain, but direction-sensitive neural correlates may emerge at different analytical levels. We reanalyzed 3,201 thermal-stimulation trials from 33 participants, integrating 0-200 warmth/pain ratings, regional fMRI activity, and trial-wise lagged coupling. Both instructions shifted ratings in the intended direction, with no reliable difference in mean success. Down-regulation was associated with lower bilateral S2/opercular and insular activity and higher left dlPFC/IFJ activity after FDR correction across 32 regions; run-matched comparisons were weaker and none survived the corresponding correction. Contrast-map Neurologic Pain Signature attenuation did not replicate in a rating-adjusted FWL-LSS trial-wise analysis despite strong temperature sensitivity. Up-regulation success covaried with an exploratory, post selection lagged dlPFC/IFJ-valuation composite (r = -0.546, 95% CI [-0.764, -0.270]). The association exceeded matched reverse-direction, zero-lag, and time-reversed controls, lay outside permutation and circular-shift nulls, and persisted after AR(1) prewhitening. A transition-level analysis across 297 up-regulation transitions preserved a negative success-by-source interaction (adjusted three-target mean beta = -0.163, cluster-bootstrap 95% CI [-0.290, -0.054], Freedman-Lane p = 0.010). Six session-wise DCM variants showed no consistent regulation-versus-passive effective-connectivity effect and did not independently validate an up-specific directed mechanism. These analyses identify a down-regulation-associated regional pattern and a candidate prefrontal-valuation coupling association requiring independent confirmation.

Matching journals

The top 5 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.