The DOI matches its Crossref record; 254 of the 260 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 120 of the 228 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis
Open accessAbstract
We review the central tenets and neuroanatomical basis of the global neuronal workspace (GNW) hypothesis, which attempts to account for the main scientific observations regarding the elementary mechanisms of conscious processing in the human brain. The GNW proposes that, in the conscious state, a non-linear network ignition associated with recurrent processing amplifies and sustains a neural representation, allowing the corresponding information to be globally accessed by local processors. We examine the GNW hypothesis in light of recent data that contrast brain activity evoked by either conscious or nonconscious contents, as well as during conscious or non-conscious states, particularly general anesthesia. We also discuss the relationship between the intertwined concepts of conscious processing, attention, and working memory.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review presents the global neuronal workspace hypothesis, arguing that conscious access arises when information triggers non-linear ignition and recurrent broadcasting across distributed cortical networks. It surveys supporting evidence from simulations, electrophysiology, imaging, anesthesia, disorders of consciousness, sleep, and development, while noting unresolved debates and comparisons with other theories.
Key findings
- The GNW proposes that conscious access depends on sudden ignition of workspace neurons, with recurrent loops amplifying and sustaining representations for global access; prefrontal and parietal hubs are important but not the exclusive site of conscious access.
- Empirical work reports a late divergence around 200–300 ms after stimulus onset between consciously perceived and unperceived trials, often linked to the P300/late-positive component, while early sensory processing can persist without awareness. Studies across visual, auditory, and tactile modalities, plus no-report monkey prefrontal recordings, support ignition; weak stimuli may fail at V1-to-V4 or V4-to-prefrontal stages.
- Anesthesia, disorders of consciousness, and sleep are associated with disrupted long-range frontoparietal connectivity, reduced dynamic repertoire, and loss of late ignition/P3, while short-latency processing can remain. Thalamic or prefrontal stimulation may restore aspects of consciousness in some cases.
- Attention and working memory overlap with GNW functions; conscious working memory is proposed to involve globally distributed persistent firing, whereas activity-silent or local memories remain unconscious until reinstated. Comparisons with IIT, RPT, and HOT note shared and divergent claims.
Methods
- Narrative review of the GNW’s central tenets, neuroanatomical basis, simulations, and empirical evidence; no new primary data are reported.
- Synthesizes computational models (Stroop, masking/inattention, macaque connectome, laminar connectivity) and human/nonhuman studies using EEG/MEG/fMRI, intracranial recordings, anesthesia, lesions, sleep, and development.
- Main analysis is conceptual integration and comparison with other theories, including discussion of causal interventions and future directions.
Limitations
- Stated: unresolved controversy over whether the P300/late positive or earlier N2/VAN indexes awareness versus post-perceptual processes; no-report paradigms have not resolved this.
- Stated: difficulty experimentally adjudicating among GNW, IIT, RPT, and HOT because of shared predictions and coarse tools; many findings are correlational, causal evidence is limited, and lesion heterogeneity plus possible covert consciousness complicate inferences from disorders of consciousness.
- Evident: as a review, it is selective and narrative rather than systematic, and some claims about development, self-consciousness, and working memory are presented as hypotheses or untested.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
49 Partly supported · 46 Own interpretation · 36 No full text of the sources · 26 Supported · 24 No basis given · 11 Supported so far · 10 Sources not found · 7 Not checked yet · 3 Own method · 1 Not supported · 1 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Own result · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“They found that sudden late ignition was the only clear signature common to all three conditions.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Noel et al., 2018 source
The Discussion section, “Neural Response Strength as a Modality-Free Indicator of Perceptual Awareness” (page unavailable), reports late evoked potentials for perceived—but not non-perceived—stimuli in visual, auditory, and audiovisual conditions, and describes the pattern as “ignition-like.” The Conclusions (page unavailable) say late evoked potentials, rather than neural reproducibility or complexity, most closely track awareness across these conditions. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Recent tracer studies in non-human primates indicate that these areas indeed connect together as a “high-efficiency cortical core” with high-density connectivity (Markov et al., 2013) (Figure 1C).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Markov et al., 2013 source
The Density and Small-World Architectures section describes retrograde-tracer studies of macaque cortical areas and predicts a densely connected interareal network. The Concluding Remarks describe a dense cortical core that contributes to communication efficiency, supporting the paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Ignition is characterized by the sudden, coherent, and exclusive activation of a subset of workspace neurons coding for the current conscious content, with the remainder of the workspace neurons being inhibited.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Dehaene et al., 2003 source
The Discussion describes ignition in the model as a sudden nonlinear transition with brain-scale synchrony, selective activation of neurons coding for the stimulus, and inhibition of neurons coding for other stimuli. The Abstract adds that mobilized workspace neurons inhibit surrounding workspace neurons. These passages support the citing sentence as a description of the model, rather than an established observation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Recent evidence in rodents demonstrated that the persistence of neuronal firing rates for working memory storage is not a purely cortical phenomenon but instead relies on the interactions with subcortical structures, including the thalamus (Guo et al., 2017) and cerebellar nuclei (Gao et al., 2018).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Guo et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract reports persistent delay-period activity in mouse motor cortex and thalamus, with inhibition of either region diminishing activity in the other. The Introduction describes this activity as a form of short-term memory. Guo et al. is cited for the thalamus portion of the sentence; the cerebellar-nuclei portion is attributed to Gao et al. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites Gao et al., 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s opening summary reports that mice used short-term memory to plan a movement and that maintaining persistent preparatory activity in frontal cortex depended on activity in a deep cerebellar nucleus. Its main text also reports persistent activity in both regions during the delay period. The citing sentence assigns the separate thalamus finding to Guo et al.; Gao et al. supports the cerebellar-nuclei part. (LLM, conf=0.91)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Its widespread presence is important for the large diversity of contents that can enter into working memory (Christophel et al., 2017).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Christophel et al., 2017 source
In “A Working Memory Gradient” (page not provided), the paper proposes that short-term information buffering can occur across cortical regions and says, accordingly, that working-memory contents range from low-level to abstract features and from sensory to motor codes. This supports the link between widespread working-memory activity and the diversity of contents it can hold. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The effects of working memory on neuronal firing rates occur in many cortical areas (Christophel et al., 2017), ranging from primary sensory cortices that code for the memories of elementary sensory features”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Christophel et al., 2017 source
The cited sentence attaches Christophel et al. to the claim that working-memory-related neuronal activity occurs across many cortical areas. The paper’s “Storage of Working Memory Contents” section reports persistent activity in sensory, parietal, and prefrontal regions, as well as other cortical areas (page not specified in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, GNW models (Dehaene et al., 2003) share many features with models for attention and working memory (Hamker, 2005), which also require interactions between neurons in widespread networks.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Dehaene et al., 2003 source
The Abstract (page not specified) describes a global neuronal workspace whose long-distance connections link sensory and higher-level areas, and says conscious information becomes available to attention and memory processes. This supports the GNW model and widespread-network features for which Dehaene et al. is cited; the attention and working-memory models are cited separately to Hamker. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hamker, 2005 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In these studies, the neuronal correlates of attention and conscious perception differed if assessed with fMRI (Watanabe et al., 2011) or MEG (Wyart et al., 2012; Wyart and Tallon-Baudry, 2008).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Watanabe et al., 2011 source
- Supportedcites Wyart et al., 2012 source
The Introduction describes a location-cueing task with masked stimuli that were sometimes consciously detected, recorded with MEG. The Discussion (‘Early dissociation between spatial attention and conscious detection’) states that the neural correlates of spatial attention and visual awareness were distinct. The fMRI finding is attributed to a different citation in the citing sentence, not to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites Wyart and Tallon-Baudry, 2008 source
The Introduction describes subjects cued to attend to a location while faint stimuli were consciously seen on only some trials. The Abstract and Figure 3 description report distinct neural correlates of visual awareness and spatial attention measured with MEG. The fMRI portion of the citing sentence is attributed to a different source, not this paper. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“provide support for the involvement of neurons in the deep cortical layers in the GNW as hypothesized in the original GNW paper (Dehaene et al., 1998).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene et al., 1998 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Theoretical Premises describe layer 5 neurons as part of reciprocal connections that help stabilize workspace activity, supporting a role for deep-layer neurons. But the paper places the long-range connectivity defining workspace neurons primarily in layers 2 and 3; it does not identify deep-layer neurons themselves as the principal workspace population. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“recent experimental evidence indicates that the reverberatory loops for persistent neuronal activity not only involve corticocortical interactions but also loop through subcortical regions with an important role for the thalamus and cerebellar nuclei (Gao et al., 2018; Guo et al., 2017).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Gao et al., 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The main text (page not available) reports that, during motor planning in mice, activity in a cerebellar nucleus is needed to maintain persistent preparatory activity in frontal cortex. It also describes a pathway from that nucleus back to the relevant cortex through the thalamus, supporting the subcortical-loop point for which Gao et al. is cited. (LLM, conf=0.89)
- Partly supportedcites Guo et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion and Abstract support a role for a recurrent cortex–thalamus loop in maintaining persistent activity. The Discussion also identifies input from deep cerebellar nuclei to the thalamus, but says the roles of those more complex loops remain unresolved; it does not establish an important role for cerebellar nuclei in maintaining persistent activity. The supplied passages have no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 91
- The quote only partly states this claim. 9
- Probably not a substantial claim. 37
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“In humans, the so-called concept cells in the anterior temporal lobe, which fire after 300 to 400 ms to specific pictures and words such as “Bill Clinton” or “the World Trade Center,” do so with stronger and longer-lasting firing rates when the corresponding stimulus is consciously perceived”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Disputedcites Gelbard-Sagiv et al., 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Disputedcites Kreiman et al., 2002 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Disputedcites Quiroga et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Disputed
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The difference, however, is that subliminal stimuli do not evoke a sudden ignition but rather a slowing, decaying wave of activity.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites King et al., 2016 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Soto and Silvanto, 2014 source
- Supportedcites Trübutschek et al., 2017 source
The Results section on conscious perception identifies a sudden increase in activity (‘ignition’) on seen trials. The Discussion describes unseen trials as showing transient non-conscious activity and an initial period of activity with slowly decaying amplitude, supporting the citing sentence’s contrast. The paper does not use the word ‘wave,’ but the substantive distinction is consistent with its account. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The simulations showed that, if feedforward connections are carefully balanced by local inhibitory influences, incoming stimuli elicit a stable cascade of activity characterized by a late and sudden ignition.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Joglekar et al., 2018 source
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene et al., 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The latency for conscious access can in fact be delayed by much more than 300 ms when attention is temporarily distracted by a secondary task (dual-task conditions)”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Marti et al., 2012, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Sergent et al., 2013 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Thibault et al., 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In this framework, ignition is seen as a sudden, high-speed divergence of the trajectories on trials reported as consciously perceived, generating a series of metastable activity states”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Baria et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not matchedcites He, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites King et al., 2016 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The GNW proposes that, in the conscious state, a non-linear network ignition associated with recurrent processing amplifies and sustains a neural representation, allowing the corresponding information to be globally accessed by local processors.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene et al., 1998 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Theoretical Premises describes sudden, all-or-none activation of a globally interconnected workspace, and Computer Simulation describes mutually reinforcing connections that sustain activity and amplify processor responses. These support much of the paraphrase, though the paper does not call the process “network ignition.” Its Conclusions explicitly limit the model to features of effortful tasks rather than an exhaustive account of conscious processing, so the claim's generalization to the conscious state goes beyond this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The first 200 ms of brain activity, corresponding to early perceptual processing, can be fully preserved on trials without conscious perception, particularly under inattention conditions”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Marti and Dehaene, 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Marti et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sergent et al., 2005 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“simulations show that the GNW is subject to a continuous stream of stochastic spontaneous activity”
- Also stated in: § Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory · plain
“This property of the model fits with the constant variations in fMRI and electroencephalogram (EEG) functional connectivity that are observed in the awake resting brain and that vanish during anesthesia or in patients with disorders of consciousness”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Barttfeld et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Demertzi et al., 2019 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory · plain
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“GNW neurons, lying at the top of a deep feedforward network, provide a compressed, high-level symbolic model of an aspect of the external world; top-down signals broadcast the predictions that this model makes to lower-level areas; and bottom-up signals convey sensory signals and may either amplify the signals predicted by top-down input”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Keller and Mrsic-Flogel, 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Kersten et al., 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rao and Ballard, 1999 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This proposal received support but also criticism, because an earlier negative event (variably called N2, N3, or even “visual awareness negativity” [VAN]) peaking at ∼260 ms and with a total duration of ∼200 ms is also often observed when contrasting conscious to unconscious stimuli”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Eklund and Wiens, 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Koivisto and Revonsuo, 2010 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These investigations reported the existence of a sudden divergence in brain activity, around 200 to 300 ms after stimulus onset, between trials with or without conscious perception, with an intense propagation of additional activity, particularly toward the prefrontal and parietal cortex, on conscious trials”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section V identifies sudden, all-or-none ignition of prefronto-parietal networks as a measure of conscious access, supporting the reported divergence and propagation. Section IV places global ignition around 200–300 ms, but also says its timing may vary with the experimental paradigm; Section II reports a 300–500 ms window in one study. The claim’s ‘regardless of stimulus modality or paradigm’ qualification is therefore not supported. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Addition of layer-specific connectivity in simulations (Mejias et al., 2016) leads to the emergence of frequency-band-specific patterns of causality (bottom-up gamma arising primarily in supragranular layers versus top-down alpha-beta arising primarily from bottom layers)”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Mejias et al., 2016 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Bastos et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Michalareas et al., 2016 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Ignition may be triggered by an external stimulus, as part of a cognitive task, or it may occur spontaneously and stochastically at rest.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results sections “Spontaneous Ignition” and “Extinction of External Stimuli by Spontaneous Ignition” describe both stimulus-evoked ignition and ignition without external stimulation; the former also says spontaneous ignitions can visit assemblies in random order. The copy does not establish the separate claim that ignition is triggered as part of a cognitive task. It also describes the simulation as deterministic, so “stochastically” should be understood as describing its observed variability rather than a random simulation mechanism. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This framework predicts that, while some signals within modular pathways may persist under non-conscious conditions, global top-down signals related to the content of working memory depend on the availability of a conscious model.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bekinschtein et al., 2009 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chao et al., 2018 source
- Partly supportedcites Charles et al., 2013 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“the GNW is not a localizationist theory of conscious access, nor is conscious access posited to exist solely in a given node of the GNW”
- Also stated in: § Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory · plain
“Rather, the GNW acts as a distributed “router” associated with millions of neurons distributed in many brain regions through which information can be amplified, sustained, and made available to specialized sensory processors and thalamocortical loops.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Boly et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Odegaard et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory · plain
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In a second stage, assumed to be mediated by the slower NMDA-mediated feedback connections, the advancing feedfor-ward wave amplified its own inputs in a cascading manner, quickly leading the whole stimulus-relevant network into a global, self-sustained, reverberating, or ignited state.”
- Also stated in: § Simulations of the Global Workspace · plain
“This ignition was characterized by an increased power of local corticothalamic oscillations in the gamma band and their synchrony across areas (Dehaene et al., 2003).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene et al., 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The second stage of the simulation is mediated by slower NMDA-mediated feedback connections.
- Also stated in: § Simulations of the Global Workspace · plain
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Irrespective of the precise interpretation of these experiments, the final result of attentional selection enters consciousness, where it can use the GNW to activate all features that belong to the same object even if they are represented in different cortical areas (Roelfsema and Houtkamp, 2011), allowing conscious perception to be occupied by coherent, multifeature, and multimodal objects (”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Roelfsema and Houtkamp, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Such recurrent circuits permit ignition and persistent neuronal firing and can either be built from local cortical circuits or include neurons in different cortical areas (Wang, 2001).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wang, 2001 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Self et al., 2013 source
- Partly supportedcites van Kerkoerle et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“For example, if subjects learn an ordered list of concepts, neurons in the medial temporal lobe start to activate if they are tuned to an upcoming item in the list (Reddy et al., 2015) and similar “prospective coding” effects have been observed in the frontal cortex of monkeys (Rainer et al., 1999).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Reddy et al., 2015 source
The Abstract reports that participants learned an ordered image sequence and that MTL neurons began firing in anticipation of their preferred image. The Results (‘Learning procedure and behaviour’) confirm that subjects learned the order of the images. The monkey frontal-cortex finding is attached to a different citation, not Reddy et al. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Rainer et al., 1999 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The van Vugt et al. (2018) results revealed that a minimum amount of activity needs to reach PFC before it elicits ignition, thereby establishing a relationship between the GNW and the classic signal detection theory (SDT)”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Vugt et al., 2018 source
- Partly supportedcites King and Dehaene, 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“This delayed response enhancement is thought to be caused by feedback from higher visual areas to V1 (Christophel et al., 2017; Klink et al., 2017; Lamme and Roelfsema, 2000).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Christophel et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Different Levels of Abstraction section discusses a possible bias signal from prefrontal cortex to early visual cortex during working memory, not delayed V1 response enhancement during figure–ground perception. Searches for figure–ground perception and feedback from higher visual areas to V1 found no passage in our copy addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Klink et al., 2017 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lamme and Roelfsema, 2000 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Several studies have dissociated attention from awareness, for example, by demonstrating that attention can be summoned to a location by a subliminal cue so that the perception of stimuli at that location is improved (for reviews and discussions, see Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Koch and Tsuchiya, 2007).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Dehaene and Changeux, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Selective Attention versus Conscious Access” (section I; page unavailable), the review says conscious access must be distinguished from attention and describes them as separate processes. The passages retrieved do not establish the cited example: that a subliminal cue draws attention to a location and improves perception of stimuli there. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Koch and Tsuchiya, 2007 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A central finding is that concept cells fire when concepts are held in working memory (Kamiński et al., 2017; Kornblith et al., 2017) and become active when these concepts are retrieved from long-term memory (Gelbard-Sagiv et al., 2008).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Kamiński et al., 2017 source
The Results section ('Activity of concept cells during working memory maintenance') reports that concept cells remained active when their preferred image was held in working memory. The long-term-memory retrieval clause is cited to a different source, so it is not part of the claim assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Supportedcites Kornblith et al., 2017 source
Kornblith et al. is cited for the working-memory part of the sentence, not the long-term-memory retrieval part. The Results (Maintenance Period Activity) report that 8% of visually selective neurons were modulated by stimuli held in working memory, and the Discussion says MTL neurons represented previously presented images during maintenance. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites Gelbard-Sagiv et al., 2008 source
The cited paper supports the long-term-memory retrieval clause, not the working-memory clause, which is attributed to other sources. Its Abstract reports that hippocampal and entorhinal neurons selective for viewed video episodes became active again during free recall of those episodes, before participants reported remembering them. The demonstrated material was specific episodes rather than concepts in general. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Attentional signals select a particular piece of information by amplifying its activity and reducing that of other competing stimuli, whereas persistent neuronal activity keeps information online in working memory (Roelfsema, 2005; Roelfsema et al., 2000; Zylberberg et al., 2011).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Roelfsema, 2005 source
- Partly supportedcites Roelfsema et al., 2000 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Sections 3.4.1 and 6.2 link attentional selection to enhanced neuronal firing, and section 3.5.2 describes a spatial signal that persists across a delay as a form of working memory. The paper also describes inhibition among competing object representations, but section 3.5.1 says it cannot distinguish active suppression of items losing relevance from passive decay. It therefore does not fully support the claim that attentional signals reduce competing stimuli’s activity. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites Zylberberg et al., 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The ‘Single decision making by evidence accumulation’ section says sustained neuronal firing stores temporary, task-relevant information, and the ‘Opinion’ section describes attentional modulation as enhanced activity for selected visual information. The copy does not say that attention reduces the activity of competing stimuli; its discussion of mutual inhibition concerns competing productions instead. Page numbers were not provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Simultaneous EEG and fMRI investigations in humans have confirmed the functional disconnection of the prefrontal cortex from the posterior cortex during propofol and sevoflurane anesthesia by fMRI, with a concomitant reduction of feedback connectivity identified using symbolic transfer entropy based on EEG signals (Jordan et al., 2013; Ranft et al., 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jordan et al., 2013 source
- Partly supportedcites Ranft et al., 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Still, it is important to note that the anesthetized brain is not just in a fixed state; recent observations found it to be more dynamic than previously considered, with metastable oscillations or connectivity patterns that appear to reflect intrinsic dynamics rather than pharmacokinetic instability or external stimuli (Hudson et al., 2014; Li et al., 2019; Vlisides et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hudson et al., 2014 source
- Not matchedcites Li et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Vlisides et al., 2019 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, persistent firing for these items is weaker than that of the attended item (Konecky et al., 2017), which may explain why they are more difficult to pick up with non-invasive methods, such as fMRI and MEG (Stokes, 2015; Trübutschek et al., 2017; Trübutschek et al., 2018).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Konecky et al., 2017 source
- Supportedcites Stokes, 2015 source
In “Implications for cognitive models” (page not provided), Stokes reports that brain imaging finds discriminable activity patterns for attended working-memory items, while unattended items are effectively activity silent. The section also says activity-silent memory challenges tools designed to measure activity states. Together, these support the cited suggestion that unattended items may be harder to detect non-invasively; the separate claim about weaker persistent firing is attributed to Konecky et al. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites Trübutschek et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section (‘Contents of conscious and non-conscious working memory can be tracked transiently’; page not provided) reports that MEG tracked seen target locations but found no statistically significant decoding of unseen locations. This supports the narrower point that some memory contents are difficult to detect with MEG. The paper does not establish that weaker persistent firing in accessory items explains the difficulty, or address their detection with fMRI. (LLM, conf=0.83)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Maintenance in working memory gave rise to similar MEG signatures as conscious ignition (Trübutschek et al., 2017), supporting the view that conscious ignition is a first step leading to the entry of information into working memory.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Trübutschek et al., 2017 source
The Results section, “Similarity of conscious perception and conscious working memory” (page unavailable), reports comparable MEG responses associated with conscious perception in the perception and working-memory tasks. It also says the same neural codes were recruited at the beginning of maintenance. The statement about ignition being a first step is the citing authors’ interpretation following the citation, not a separate finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Electrocorticography during propofol (Malekmohammadi et al., 2018) and ketamine (Schroeder et al., 2016) anesthesia in human and non-human primates, respectively, reveals disrupted functional connectivity across the S1 and M1 cortex, as well as altered beta oscillations, which are typically associated with feedback processing (Bastos et al., 2015).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Malekmohammadi et al., 2018 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Partly supportedcites Schroeder et al., 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Supportedcites Bastos et al., 2015 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This dynamic signature of conscious processing was initially discovered in fMRI studies of awake versus anesthetized monkeys (Barttfeld et al., 2015) and later found to generalize to humans in vegetative or minimally conscious states (Demertzi et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Barttfeld et al., 2015 source
The Results describe resting-state fMRI comparisons of awake and propofol-sedated macaques. The paper’s opening section identifies the richer, more flexible dynamics during wakefulness as a signature of consciousness. The later finding in humans is attributed to Demertzi et al. (2019), not to this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites Demertzi et al., 2019 source
The citation to Demertzi et al. supports the human portion of the sentence; the earlier monkey finding is attributed to Barttfeld et al. In the Results (Fig. 3), Demertzi et al. report that coordination patterns vary with preserved or diminished consciousness in patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (vegetative state) and minimally conscious state. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Subsequent investigation revealed that the perturbational complexity index might be useful in stratifying patients with pathologic disorders of conscious access (Casarotto et al., 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Casarotto et al., 2016 source
The Abstract (Interpretation) states that PCI offers an independently validated stratification of unresponsive patients. The Discussion (PCI-Based Assessment of VS Patients) also describes its potential place in a diagnostic approach to disorders of consciousness, supporting the citing sentence’s hedged claim. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, some surrogate measures of Φ have been successfully applied to altered levels of consciousness in humans (Kim et al., 2018) and also shown to relate to network factors such as topological modularity (Kim et al., 2018) or critical dynamics (Kim and Lee, 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Kim et al., 2018 source
The Conclusion says the EEG-based Φ estimate was applied to human states of consciousness altered by anesthesia. The Results section, “Relationship between Φ¯ and functional brain network structure,” reports a strong negative correlation between Φ¯ and the number of network modules. The critical-dynamics point is attributed to a different citation, not to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites Kim and Lee, 2019 source
The citation to Kim and Lee (2019) supports the critical-dynamics clause, not the separate topological-modularity clause cited to Kim et al. (2018). In Section 5, the paper reports that changes in its surrogate measure of Φ correlate with changes in a measure of criticality in human EEG during general anesthesia. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“IIT’s Φ cannot be easily computed from large-scale data, making it difficult to test the theory (for attempts, see Oizumi et al., 2016 and Tajima et al., 2015).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Oizumi et al., 2016 source
The Results section says the original Φ is difficult to apply to experimental data because estimating the required transition probabilities for all possible states is nearly impossible in an actual neural system. It also explains that computational costs grow exponentially with system size and presents Φ* with a Gaussian approximation as a practical attempt to address that difficulty. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Could not verifycites Tajima et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses challenges in characterizing brain-wide dynamics, and the Discussion relates the cross-embedding findings to theories of consciousness. Neither passage says that IIT’s Φ is difficult to compute from large-scale data or that this makes IIT difficult to test. Searches for Φ, integrated information, and computational difficulty found no passage addressing that specific claim. (LLM, conf=0.70)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Given that lucid dreaming is considered a hybrid of REM sleep and waking (Voss et al., 2009), studies demonstrating a causal role for the prefrontal cortex in lucid dreaming thus also support a role for the prefrontal cortex in waking consciousness.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Voss et al., 2009 source
The Abstract describes lucid dreaming as a hybrid state with measurable differences from both waking and REM sleep. The Regional Differences section likewise says it has features of each. The cited paper supports the hybrid-state premise attributed to it; the subsequent inference about the prefrontal cortex is the citing authors’ own argument. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Indeed, electrical stimulation of the central thalamus has recently been shown to reverse the anesthetized state in non-human primates, in association with a return of corticocortical connectivity (Donoghue et al., 2019; Redinbaugh et al., 2020; J. Tasserie et al., 2019, Soc. Neurosci., conference).).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Donoghue et al., 2019 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page not specified) reports that central-thalamus stimulation awakened propofol-anesthetized non-human primates and restored awake-like cortical activity. The paper discusses corticocortical coherence when comparing awake and unconscious states, but the passages on stimulation do not show that corticocortical connectivity returned during stimulation. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Supportedcites Redinbaugh et al., 2020 source
The Results section, “Gamma-frequency CL stimulation increased consciousness level,” reports that electrical stimulation of the central lateral thalamus roused anesthetized macaques. The Results section, “Thalamocortical and corticocortical interactions showed pathway-specific NCC,” reports that effective stimulation restored frontoparietal coherence, a measure of corticocortical connectivity. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not matchedcites J. Tasserie et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Similarly, surrogate measures, such as the perturbational complexity index that have shown promise (Casali et al., 2013), might have originated in one theory (in this case, IIT), but, as noted earlier, the results are consistent with other theories, e.g., the GNW, which also proposes that conscious processing critically depends on the integration of differentiated processors across a network.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Casali et al., 2013 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, IIT has served as a theoretical framework for more practical measures, such as the perturbational complexity index, which has been successful in differentiating levels of consciousness in the setting of physiological, pharmacological, and pathological perturbations (Casali et al., 2013).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Casali et al., 2013 source
The Introduction describes the theoretical principle that consciousness requires both integration and differentiation, and the Discussion says PCI is calculated from principles derived from theoretical neuroscience. The Discussion reports that PCI discriminated levels of consciousness across sleep, anesthetic sedation, and brain-injured patient states. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“At birth, all major long-distance fiber tracts are already in place (Dubois et al., 2016), although still immature in terms of both their terminal connectivity and their myelination.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Dubois et al., 2016 source
The Introduction (page not provided) states that all major long-distance fibers are observed by the end of the late preterm period, supporting the claim that they are in place at birth. The qualification about immature connectivity and myelination is not directly attached to this citation, but the Introduction also describes postnatal refinement and ongoing myelination. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Importantly, the baby brain is not a miniature adult brain; regional changes of brain connectivity and differential myelination take place that are asynchronous and protracted (Dehaene-Lambertz and Spelke, 2015; Dubois et al., 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dehaene-Lambertz and Spelke, 2015 source
- Supportedcites Dubois et al., 2016 source
The Introduction describes connections forming sequentially, being refined after birth, and myelination continuing during development. It explicitly says maturation is asynchronous across brain areas: sensory regions develop early, while associative regions develop into adolescence. The Conclusion likewise says these mechanisms occur at different times and speeds across regions. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Such recursion is absent or very limited in other animals; although they may acquire some language-like symbolic abilities, they do so at a very slow pace and up to a limited level (Jiang et al., 2018; Yang, 2013).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Jiang et al., 2018 source
The Introduction says attempts to teach nonhuman animals nested or recursive sequences had mostly produced negative results. The Results and Discussion show the important qualification: macaques did learn two supra-regular grammars, but only after thousands of trials, whereas preschoolers learned them within a handful. The source supports the claim’s “very limited” alternative, not an absolute absence of recursion. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites Yang, 2013 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that Nim learned about 125 signs but lacked the combinatorial range of a rule-based grammar. The Discussion says chimpanzees showed patterns of imitation even after years of training. This supports limited language-like abilities in the primates discussed, but the paper does not establish that recursion is absent or limited in other animals generally, or measure the pace at which they acquire symbolic abilities. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The data are insufficient to determine whether those processes correspond to the type of sensory processing that is known to be preserved in coma patients or whether a lowest level of minimal consciousness, as characterized in adult disorders of consciousness (Chennu et al., 2017), may already exist in preterm infants (Lagercrantz et al., 2010).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Chennu et al., 2017 source
The citation is attached to the characterization of minimal consciousness in adult disorders of consciousness, not to the claim about insufficient data in preterm infants. The Results distinguish minimally conscious minus (MCS−) from unresponsive patients and from minimally conscious plus (MCS+) patients, supporting that characterization. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not matchedcites Lagercrantz et al., 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Social relationships, which appear altered in autism and autism spectrum disorder, are thought to affect the GNW architectures for conscious processing (Bourgeron, 2015; Graziano and Kast-ner, 2011).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bourgeron, 2015 source
- Partly supportedcites Graziano and Kast-ner, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Awareness as a product of social perception” (page unavailable), the paper proposes that social-perception machinery contributes awareness to information in a global workspace. It does not say that social relationships alter GNW architecture or address autism or autism spectrum disorder in the passages found (searched: GNW, global workspace, autism, social relationships). (LLM, conf=0.83)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The early recurrent loops occur in lower areas (Lamme and Roelfsema, 2000) and may correspond to VAN (Koivisto and Revonsuo, 2010). As later recurrent loops involve higher areas, including the frontal-parietal network, global recurrent processing ensues.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These convergent findings indicate that conscious access is not attached to early sensory processing but instead relates to a late stage whose timing is often decoupled from the timing of the actual stimulus.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the neuronal level, the GNW hypothesis postulates a key role for large pyramidal cells in cortical layer II/III (Figure 1B) but also a contribution of pyramidal cells in deeper layer V, as illustrated by recent studies (see below).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This simulation showed that workspace activation increased during the acquisition of a novel task, its effortful execution, and after errors.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Simulations of the Global Workspace
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Note that these areas are neither identical nor redundant: each has their own functional specificity and connectivity pattern, yet the communication between them is so extensive and rapid that any information available to one is quickly made available to others.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Central Tenets and Neuroanatomical Basis of the GNW Theory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both perceived and unperceived stimuli caused activity in V1 and V4, but only the perceived ones elicited a sudden, strong, and sustained activity in the frontal cortex akin to ignition.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Vugt et al., 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Multivariate decoders trained to classify perceived versus unperceived stimuli identified a late sudden ignition (>200 ms) that generalized across modalities.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sanchez et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In many experiments, the N2 simply precedes the P3, and their succession may index the spread of global ignition as reflected in intracranial and MEG signals.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Pitts et al., 2012, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pitts et al., 2018 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This observation is important because tampering with NMDA receptors, by using ketamine, for instance, may selectively affect ignition and conscious perception, mimicking the impairment of conscious perception observed in schizophrenia (Berkovitch et al., 2017).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Berkovitch et al., 2017 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, models of attentional feature integration share the GNW’s aim to integrate information across distributed cortical processors.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The van Vugt et al. (2018) data were explained well by a late difference in PFC activity between stimuli that were and were not reported, with only modest (but significant) differences in the late recurrent activation of visual cortex”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Vugt et al. (2018) source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The binding mechanisms co-select distributed feature representations that are part of a single object and explain why the object representations that become part of conscious experience are usually coherent and integrated.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Although most experiments on conscious perception are correlational in nature and merely observe neural “correlates” or “signatures” of conscious perception, some studies (Manita et al., 2015; Sachidhanandam et al., 2013) provide evidence for a causal role of top-down inputs in perception.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Pharmacological studies indicate that, in agreement with the GNW hypothesis (Dehaene and Changeux, 2005), the initial feedforward sweep predominantly relies on AMPA glutamate receptors, whereas NMDA receptors play a dominant role in the later feedback effects (Self et al., 2012).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Self et al., 2012 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, we note that the spatial location that was attended to in some of these experiments differed from the feature for which consciousness was established (e.g., a grating at that location), implying that the dissociation was incomplete: subjects presumably could not direct feature-based attention to features that failed to enter consciousness, and conversely, they were most likely aware of”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These cells are found in the medial temporal lobe of humans and activate when subjects perceive or think about specific concepts.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Working memory operations can thereby execute the successive mental steps required to solve a task and permit mental simulations; i.e., subjects can navigate through sequences of working memory states to explore the future consequences of actions (Pezzulo and Cisek, 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pezzulo and Cisek, 2016 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together, these findings suggest that the critical brain regions engaging in the recurrent interactions for conscious perception may be task and stimulus dependent: whereas recurrent, metastable activity in the PFC and interconnected associative areas may be systematically present during conscious perception, recurrent interactions with primary sensory areas may play a role or not, depending”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In tasks that rely on recurrent interactions between V1 and higher areas, V1 neurons become part of the GNW, and the fine-grained visual percepts can enter into conscious awareness.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It should be recognized that what we call “attention” is actually a diverse set of temporal, spatial, and cognitive filters; thus, many of these filters may operate non-consciously, with only the final one gating entry in the global workspace.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace, Attention, and the Content of Consciousness
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Feedback from the frontal cortex thereby amplifies neuronal activity elicited by tactile stimuli in the somatosensory cortex, and this amplification predicts successful perception (Sachidhanandam et al., 2013; Takahashi et al., 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, our experience builds associative memory networks, in which activity can spread from one concept to the next, a function that resembles the spread of activity for attentional operations described above.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Together, these results suggest that conscious access depends on recurrent interactions between higher cortical areas (e.g., the frontal and parietal cortex) that can maintain a representation of a weak stimulus as persistent activity until a behavioral response is required by the task.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Empirical Evidence in Support of the Ignition Concept
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The initial feedforward activity elicited in the visual cortex was driven by the texture elements in the neurons’ receptive fields, whereas later activity reflected successful figure-ground perception; figures that reached awareness elicited more V1 activity than the background, but figures that stayed subliminal did not.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Supèr et al., 2001 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“studies that examined tactile perception in mice revealed that it is associated with the reverberation of activity between the frontal cortex and somatosensory cortex that is accompanied by NDMA-receptor-driven calcium events in the distal dendrites of sensory neurons (Larkum, 2013).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Larkum, 2013 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“If the feedback from a higher cortical area, the mouse secondary motor cortex, back to somatosensory cortex is silenced optogenetically, the late amplification in the somatosensory cortex is selectively attenuated and perception is prevented (Manita et al., 2015).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The Role of Recurrent Activity
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Manita et al., 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the clinical setting, for example, it is well known that long-latency-evoked potentials are preferentially susceptible to general anesthesia, whereas short-latency potentials are preserved (Banoub et al., 2003).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Banoub et al., 2003 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recent experiments support this view; whenever the information in working memory must be transformed, an active form of working memory is reinstated, and a decodable state of activity reemerges, accompanied by classical signatures of conscious access (Trübutschek et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Trübutschek et al., 2019 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that the attended working memory item is conscious and uses the GNW for broadcasting.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, Ma et al., (2019) found hypersynchrony, also a mechanism that would restrict information transfer, between frontal eye fields and the lateral intraparietal area in monkeys anesthetized with propofol.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ma et al., (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Mongillo and colleagues proposed that the additional working memory items can also be stored as short-term changes in synaptic weights so that their representation can be quickly reinstalled when useful (Mongillo et al., 2008), a form of working memory that is called “activity-silent.””
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mongillo et al., 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, we propose that working memory is conscious only when it is coded by global, highly distributed persistent neural firing, as occurs during both initial encoding, during the later refresh stage, and when the memory item influences other mental processing steps.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Such periodic refreshing may correspond to early psychological conceptions of working memory as a decaying buffer that requires regular rehearsal to be refreshed (Baddeley, 2012).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baddeley, 2012 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The disruption of functional interactions of the GNW during general anesthesia may, in part, be mediated by effects on the thalamus, which is depressed by virtually all sedative-hypnotic drugs (with the exception of ketamine) (Mashour and Alkire, 2013a).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mashour and Alkire, 2013a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such a disruption would reduce the probability of information being available to other cognitive systems, including working memory, which may comprehensively account for the functional outcome of general anesthesia in routine clinical care.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On one end of the spectrum, anesthetics can render the brain persistently isoelectric, thereby completely disrupting information processing.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crucially, this view predicts that activity-silent working memories, although capable of bridging over delays, differ in an important way: only active neural states can be mentally transformed, e.g., by mental rotation, whereas activity-silent states merely store previously computed states (and thus should be more appropriately termed short-term memory).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Conscious Representations and Working Memory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clinically, the two major therapeutic traits of the anesthetized state are hypnosis and amnesia.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, a key correlate of REM-sleep dreaming involves structures of the GNW, and, importantly, this correlation happens in the absence of report (which occurs only after waking).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IIT, on the other hand, minimizes the relevance of the prefrontal cortex and, based on anatomical considerations, considers a posterior complex—the so-called posterior cortical “hot zone”—to be sufficient for conscious experience.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The GNW theory is representational in nature and views consciousness as an evolved neurocomputational system that enables the global sharing of representations.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, the effects of general anesthetics in suppressing recurrent processing (both locally and globally) are broadly consistent with all four theories.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The GNW relies upon well-defined neuronal architectures, including cellular and molecular mechanisms of information processing that extract, represent, and manipulate information originating from both outside the brain (from interactions with the environment) and inside the brain (from spontaneous activity patterns).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Indeed, it is dreaming during REM sleep that has been argued to represent “proto-consciousness,” a building block for conscious experience during wakefulness (Hobson, 2009).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hobson, 2009 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For HOTs, the role of the prefrontal cortex is to generate a second-order, metacognitive representation of a first-order state (e.g., one generated by primary sensory cortex).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During sleep, the brain not only loses its normal level or state of conscious processing (and occasionally gains access to internally generated dreams), but also loses the capacity to access specific sensory contents.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, IIT is ostensibly a theory of phenomenal consciousness, whereas the GNW theory is focused on conscious access and processing and, furthermore, brings into question the very distinction between phenomenal and access consciousness.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, the GNW proposes that conscious access requires a more extensive architecture of reverberant loops, including frontal-parietal regions that enable access of a given representation to a wider array of modular processors.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although there is an abundance of neuroimaging studies focused on pathologic disorders of consciousness, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding support for specific theories of conscious processing because of the heterogeneity of lesions and the possibility of covert consciousness in the setting of behavioral unresponsiveness.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The RPT of consciousness (Lamme, 2006, 2010) also shares with the GNW the postulate that, given a hierarchically ordered neurocognitive architecture, feedforward processing is not sufficient for conscious processing, whereas feedback from higher-order to lower-order areas is critical.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lamme, 2006, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, there is no clear function assigned to consciousness according to HOT.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although this experiment was inspired by an alternative theory of consciousness (integrated information theory [IIT], discussed further below), the results are fully compatible with the GNW, which predicts that the conscious state leads to a deeper and more prolonged propagation of activation through long-distance connections compared to the unconscious state.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As noted, REM-sleep dreaming, during which there is a metabolic deactivation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (Maquet et al., 1996), is still associated with high-frequency activity in the prefrontal cortex.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maquet et al., 1996 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, global broadcasting is an important function associated with consciousness according to the GNW theory.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In addition to its role in transmitting arousal and sensory signals, non-sensory nuclei of the thalamus are thought to play a role in working memory (outlined above) and to facilitate the coordination of cortical communication (Saalmann et al., 2012, 2014), which is important to a functional GNW.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Saalmann et al., 2012, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since, for higher-order theory, the meta-representation is the mechanism by which a first-order representation becomes conscious, the prefrontal cortex is the ultimate source of consciousness.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In RPT, which has focused primarily on the visual modality, re-entrant or feedback processes within sensory processing pathways are considered sufficient for phenomenal experience.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the GNW and IIT are superficially aligned regarding certain aspects of how conscious processes are generated—e.g., both require integrated neural processing beyond the level of primary sensory cortex—these two theories are grounded in foundationally different perspectives of brain function.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both the GNW and IIT ascribe importance to neural activity beyond early sensory cortices, neural information sharing, and recurrent connections as a mechanism of integration.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As noted, the prefrontal cortex is one of the nodes of the highly distributed GNW network.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Transcranial direct-current stimulation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may also transiently enhance the level of consciousness in some patients in a minimally conscious state (Thibaut et al., 2014, 2015), and similar observations exist in normal subjects (Douglas et al., 2015).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Thibaut et al., 2014, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Douglas et al., 2015 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, an elevated threshold for conscious perception has been reported in patients with frontal-lobe syndrome, neglect, multiple sclerosis, or schizophrenia and related to abnormal long-distance fiber tracts, as measured by diffusion tensor imaging (Del Cul et al., 2009; Pettersson-Yeo et al., 2011; Reuter et al., 2007, 2009; Thiebaut de Schotten et al., 2005).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Global Neuronal Workspace and the Level of Consciousness
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, IIT proposes that the system (e.g., the brain, in a biological instantiation) is closed and non-representational; information is abstractly generated by the system and for the system.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > The GNW and Other Theories of Consciousness
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results therefore reveal that the elementary mechanisms underlying ignition are already present in infancy—although they undoubtedly undergo a maturation and an acceleration during development, in addition to the development of more elaborate higher-order processes.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the GNW hypothesis is bringing considerable coherence to otherwise distant fields of research.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“25- to 30-week preterm babies can already process tactile and painful stimuli in the sensory cortex (Bartocci et al., 2006), discriminate sounds (Mahmoudzadeh et al., 2013), and perceive pain (Bembich et al., 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There is currently no good theory of how the brain achieves such meta-representations, although algorithmic models are beginning to be formulated within the abstract framework of lambda calculus (Goodman and Frank, 2016).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Goodman and Frank, 2016 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Primary sensorimotor areas develop earlier than adjacent unimodal associative cortices, whereas higher-order associative regions and their long-range connectivity further develop later and slowly over decades (Dubois et al., 2014; Lebenberg et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The GNW hypothesis—even in its simple and limited original formulation—has thus far received substantial experimental support.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, the same regions appear to be involved during self-consciousness and during the representation of other people’s thoughts (theory of mind).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, intracranial recordings indicate that the early ERN is not predic-tive of whether subjects will react more slowly on the next trial but rather that such bridging across time, putatively associated with error awareness, relies on late sustained, integrative, and synchronous neural firing (Fu et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fu et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As in sensory access, the first ∼200 ms of firing, corresponding to the ERN, can occur even for non-conscious errors, whereas the late ignition occurs only when the error is consciously detected (Nieuwenhuis et al., 2001).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nieuwenhuis et al., 2001 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When the conscious intention and the actual ongoing response diverge, as may occur due to differential noise or conflicting stimuli, an error is detected (Charles et al., 2013, 2014).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Charles et al., 2013, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For instance, the human brain may also host an internal model of its own attention, an “attention schema” similar to the “body schema,” that serves as a basis for our subjective sense of awareness (Graziano et al., 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Graziano et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Within the first year of life, all GNW areas quickly become active, including the prefrontal cortex, although their lack of myelination renders them very slow to process information (Dehaene-Lambertz and Spelke, 2015).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dehaene-Lambertz and Spelke, 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In simple motor tasks, erroneous responses elicit an early error-related negativity (ERN) arising from the pre-supplementary motor area and the dorsal anterior cingulated cortex (Fu et al., 2019), followed by a later igni-tion of a late positive response (the error-positivity [PE], similar to the P3 wave).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fu et al., 2019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A multisite, preregistered, adversarial collaboration testing the main predictions of the GNW versus IIT using fMRI, MEG, and intracranial recordings during passive viewing and active dual-tasking is currently underway (Reardon, 2019).”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Reardon, 2019 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The current hypothesis is that of a simple consistency check between two simultaneous processes: a fast, non-conscious route linking perception to action and a slower, conscious route that computes the intended response.”
§ Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis > Introduction > Future Directions
plaindirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The second stage of the simulation is mediated by slower NMDA-mediated feedback connections.
“In a second stage, assumed to be mediated by the slower NMDA-mediated feedback connections”
The paper relies on this without support.
Severe encephalitis caused by antibodies against NMDA receptors produces psychotic symptoms and then complete loss of consciousness.
“In fact, a severe form of encephalitis due to antibodies against NMDA receptors leads to psychotic symptoms followed by a complete loss of consciousness, suggesting a causal link between NMDA-mediated top-down connectivity and conscious perception.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Some degree of functional architecture among GNW nodes is preserved during anesthesia.
“Even assuming some degree of preserved functional architecture among nodes of the GNW during anesthesia (as in Figure 5)”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Social consciousness engages cortical areas including the superior temporal sulcus, temporoparietal junction, and medial prefrontal cortex, mostly in the right hemisphere.
“Social consciousness is assumed to engage cortical areas, including the superior temporal sulcus, the temporoparietal junction, and the medial prefrontal cortex, mostly in the right hemisphere (Graziano and Kastner, 2011).”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Before this study, predictions from IIT and GNWT were typically tested with one data modality at a time23,24, leaving room for negative results to be easily attributed to the limitations of the chosen modality51.”
From Adversarial testing of global neuronal workspace and integrated information theories of consciousness (2025) · cites this paper as [23]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, now both theories increasingly try to explain processes, contents, and states/levels, 28,16 a tendency shared with RPT, PP/NREP, and DIT.12,14,56”
From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [28]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Global workspace theorists have also pointed out that the high density of long-range excitatory pyramidal neurons found in the ACC could plausibly serve as a substrate for a highly integrative function, such as consciousness (Dehaene and Changeux, 2011;Mashour et al., 2020).”
From Does the Prefrontal Cortex Play an Essential Role in Consciousness? Insights from Intracranial Electrical Stimulation of the Human Brain (2021) · cites this paper as Mashour et al., 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“There is extensive evidence for global workspace theory, drawn from many studies, of which we can mention only a few representative examples (see Dehaene 2014 andMashour et al. 2020 for reviews).”
From Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness (2023) · cites this paper as Mashour et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This widespread activity seems to arise late in perceptual processing, around 250-300ms after stimulus onset, supporting the claim that global broadcast requires sustained perceptual representations (Mashour et al. 2020).”
From Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness (2023) · cites this paper as Mashour et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Consequently, at present, examples of theories that arguably meet the two criteria include recurrent processing theory (RPT) [ 24 -26], GWT [ 22,23,27,28], higher-order theories (HOT) [ 29 -31], and attention schema theory (AST) [ 32,33].”
From Identifying indicators of consciousness in AI systems (2026) · cites this paper as [28]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A neurobiology-inspired version of the GWT was later proposed as the GNWT.6,28,59,60 It takes the same functional concept of a global workspace but links it to specific brain networks and neuronal characteristics.”
From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [28]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“GNWT implies that conscious access (AC) depends on RP, as its ''ignition'' and reverberant activity realizes access to conscious content.28”
From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [28]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In these models (Dehaene et al. 1998, Sergent and Dehaene 2004, Tsuchiya et al. 2015, Tononi et al. 2016, Mashour et al. 2020, Albantakis et al. 2023), the substrate of consciousness is understood to be a pattern of membrane electrical activity across a population of distributed neurons.”
From A quantum microtubule substrate of consciousness is experimentally supported and solves the binding and epiphenomenalism problems (2025) · cites this paper as Mashour et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“According to global neuronal workspace theory, the main development of GWT in neuroscience, 'ignition is characterized by the sudden, coherent, and exclusive activation of a subset of workspace neurons coding for the current conscious content, with the remainder of the workspace neurons being inhibited' (Mashour et al. (2020); 777). In other words, ignition is a non-linear process whereby a single”
From A Case for AI Consciousness: Language Agents and Global Workspace Theory (2024) · cites this paper as Mashour et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“GNWT has been increasingly described in terms of Bayesian inference (Dehaene, 2020; Mashour et al., 2020), including in a recently proposed Predictive Global Neuronal Workspace model (Whyte and Smith, 2020).”
From An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness (2020) · cites this paper as Mashour et al., 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“GNWT instead posits that consciousness arises from global broadcasting and late amplification (or ‘ignition’) of information across interconnected networks of higher-order sensory, parietal and especially prefrontal cortex (PFC)”
From Adversarial testing of global neuronal workspace and integrated information theories of consciousness (2025) · cites this paper as [23]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In any case, the PFC comprises many subregions (Fig. 2), and various models of the PFC and consciousness often propose prominent roles for areas other than the lateral PFC (Dehaene and Changeux, 2011;Brown et al., 2019;Mashour et al., 2020).”
From Does the Prefrontal Cortex Play an Essential Role in Consciousness? Insights from Intracranial Electrical Stimulation of the Human Brain (2021) · cites this paper as Mashour et al., 2020
Citations
Cites
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
A feature-integration theory of attention.
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5 · Cited by 12,366 · cited 1×
“An important role of attention is to establish relationships between features represented in different brain areas and bind them into coherent representations (Treisman and Gelade, 1980).”
BackgroundThe magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779 · cited 1×
“Psychological theories of working memory distinguish between several activation states (Cowan, 2001; Oberauer, 2002).”
BackgroundDynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood
Gogtay, N., Giedd, J. N., Lusk, L., Hayashi, K. M., Greenstein, D., Vaituzis, A. C., Nugent, T. F., Herman, D. H., Clasen, L. S., Toga, A. W., et al. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0402680101 · Cited by 5,604
Rao, R. P. N., & Ballard, D. H. (1999) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/4580 · Cited by 5,483 · cited 1×
“However, the GNW framework can be combinedwith Bayesian inference (Keller and Mrsic-Flogel, 2018; Kersten et al., 2004; Rao and Ballard, 1999), leading to a more precise functional interpretation of topdown broadcasting.”
BackgroundThe faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569 · Cited by 5,189
Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies
Baddeley, A. (2012) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422 · Cited by 4,271
(1988) · Cited by 3,656
Experimental and theoretical approaches to conscious processing
Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J.-P. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.018 · Cited by 2,573 · cited 5×
“…studies have dissociated attention from awareness, for example, by demonstrating that attention can be summoned to a location by a subliminal cue so that the perception of stimuli at that location is improved (for reviews and discussions, see Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Koch and Tsuchiya, 2007).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationTowards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: basic evidence and a workspace framework
Dehaene, S. (2001) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00123-2 · Cited by 2,498 · cited 2×
“what we subjectively experience as a conscious state” (Dehaene and Naccache, 2001).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Seth, A. K., & Bayne, T. (2022) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-022-00587-4 · Cited by 880
Cellular Mechanisms of Conscious Processing
Aru, J., Suzuki, M., & Larkum, M. E. (2020) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2020.07.006 · Cited by 321
“Why? Some theories include the notion of a critical threshold of activation or ‘ignition’ level of interactions between brain areas [8,10].”
BackgroundInfluentialA Synergistic Core for Human Brain Evolution and Cognition
Luppi, A. I., Mediano, P. A. M., Rosas, F. E., Holland, N., Fryer, T. D., O’Brien, J. T., Rowe, J. B., Menon, D. K., Bor, D., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2022) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-022-01070-0 · Cited by 314
How critical is brain criticality?
O’Byrne, J., & Jerbi, K. (2022) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2022.08.007 · Cited by 283
Northoff, G., & Lamme, V. (2020) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.019 · Cited by 247
The Edge of Sentience: Risk and Precaution in Humans, Other Animals, and AI
Birch, J. (2024) · doi:10.1093/9780191966729.001.0001 · Cited by 236
A neural correlate of sensory consciousness in a corvid bird
Nieder, A., Wagener, L., & Rinnert, P. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb1447 · Cited by 218
Predicting lapses of attention with sleep-like slow waves
Andrillon, T., Burns, A. C., Mackay, T., Windt, J., & Tsuchiya, N. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-23890-7 · Cited by 236
Hard criteria for empirical theories of consciousness
Doerig, A., Schurger, A., & Herzog, M. H. (2021) · Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/17588928.2020.1772214 · Cited by 194
“Dehaene and collegues subsequently proposed the global neuronal workspace theory (Dehaene & Naccache, 2001; Mashour et al., 2020).”
BackgroundConsciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness
Butlin, P., Long, R., Elmoznino, E., Bengio, Y., Birch, J., Constant, A., Deane, G., Fleming, S. M., Frith, C., Ji, X., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.08708 · Cited by 196
Making the hard problem of consciousness easier
Melloni, L., Mudrik, L., Pitts, M., & Koch, C. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abj3259 · Cited by 190
Putting the “mental” back in “mental disorders”: a perspective from research on fear and anxiety
Taschereau‐Dumouchel, V., Michel, M., Lau, H. C., Hofmann, S. G., & LeDoux, J. E. (2022) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-021-01395-5 · Cited by 200
“Our higher-order theory is, in some sense, constructionist and conceptual in nature, but it has a broader view of the non-conscious precursors [107, 116, 118, 123, 145, 153] and it highlights the idea that the conscious experience is the emotion (also see [45]).”
BackgroundDistinguishing the Neural Correlates of Perceptual Awareness and Postperceptual Processing
Cohen, M. A., Ortego, K., Kyroudis, A., & Pitts, M. A. (2020) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0120-20.2020 · Cited by 171
Perceptual awareness negativity: a physiological correlate of sensory consciousness
Dembski, C., Koch, C., & Pitts, M. (2021) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2021.05.009 · Cited by 157
Tasserie, J., Uhrig, L., Sitt, J. D., Manasova, D., Dupont, M., Dehaene, S., & Jarraya, B. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abl5547 · Cited by 171
“Thus, conscious access is achieved by corticocortical loops and corticosubcortical loops ( 10 ).”
Self-citationDynamical consequences of regional heterogeneity in the brain’s transcriptional landscape
Deco, G., Aquino, K. M., Arnatkevičiūtė, A., Oldham, S., Sabaroedin, K., Rogasch, N. C., Kringelbach, M. L., & Fornito, A. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf4752 · Cited by 170
Predictive processing as a systematic basis for identifying the neural correlates of consciousness
Hohwy, J., & Seth, A. (2020) · Philosophy and the Mind Sciences · doi:10.33735/phimisci.2020.ii.64 · Cited by 170
Tests for consciousness in humans and beyond
Bayne, T., Seth, A. K., Massimini, M., Shepherd, J., Cleeremans, A., Fleming, S. M., Malach, R., Mattingley, J. B., Menon, D. K., Owen, A. M., et al. (2024) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.010 · Cited by 198
The ConTraSt database for analysing and comparing empirical studies of consciousness theories
Yaron, I., Melloni, L., Pitts, M., & Mudrik, L. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01284-5 · Cited by 147
Safron, A. (2020) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2020.00030 · Cited by 133
“GNWT has been increasingly described in terms of Bayesian inference (Dehaene, 2020; Mashour et al., 2020), including in a recently proposed Predictive Global Neuronal Workspace model (Whyte and Smith, 2020).”
Northoff, G., & Zilio, F. (2022) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2022.113788 · Cited by 149
Browning, H., & Birch, J. (2022) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.12822 · Cited by 173
Information decomposition and the informational architecture of the brain
Luppi, A. I., Rosas, F. E., Mediano, P. A. M., Menon, D. K., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2024) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.11.005 · Cited by 134
“…able to perform cognitively useful computation just by having redundant copies of the same information (integration-as-oneness): computation and complex cognition demand that information should eventually be combined (integration-as-cooperation) if they are to subserve adaptive behaviour [29,30].”
All in Good Time: Long-Lasting Postdictive Effects Reveal Discrete Perception
Herzog, M. H., Drissi-Daoudi, L., & Doerig, A. (2020) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2020.07.001 · Cited by 129
Cogitate Consortium, Ferrante, O., Gorska-Klimowska, U., Henin, S., Hirschhorn, R., Khalaf, A., Lepauvre, A., Liu, L., Richter, D., Vidal, Y., et al. (2025) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-025-08888-1 · Cited by 136
“Before this study, predictions from IIT and GNWT were typically tested with one data modality at a time 23,24 , leaving room for negative results to be easily attributed to the limitations of the chosen modality 51 .”
InfluentialSelf-citationCan insects feel pain? A review of the neural and behavioural evidence
(2022) · Advances in Insect Physiology · doi:10.1016/bs.aiip.2022.10.001 · Cited by 121
General anesthesia globally synchronizes activity selectively in layer 5 cortical pyramidal neurons
Bharioke, A., Munz, M., Brignall, A. C., Kosche, G., Eizinger, M. F., Ledergerber, N., Hillier, D., Scherf, B. G., Conzelmann, K., Macé, É., et al. (2022) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2022.03.032 · Cited by 133
“One view is that communication in cortico-cortical loops between distinct cortical regions underlies the generation of conscious perception (Mashour et al., 2020; Tononi et al., 2016).”
A dopamine gradient controls access to distributed working memory in the large-scale monkey cortex
Froudist‐Walsh, S., Bliss, D. P., Ding, X., Rapan, L., Niu, M., Knoblauch, K., Zilles, K., Kennedy, H., Palomero‐Gallagher, N., & Wang, X. (2021) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2021.08.024 · Cited by 122
LeDoux, J. E. (2021) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2021.0292 · Cited by 125
An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness
Storm, J. F., Klink, P. C., Aru, J., Senn, W., Goebel, R., Pigorini, A., Avanzini, P., Vanduffel, W., Roelfsema, P. R., Massimini, M., et al. (2024) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2024.02.004 · Cited by 114
“64 It has gathered support in recent years, 28 for instance, from human neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies that show a distinct divergence in brain activity around 200 to 300 millisec-onds after stimulus onset that depends on conscious perception 65,66 and has been observed across…”
InfluentialSelf-citationAnterior insula regulates brain network transitions that gate conscious access
Huang, Z., Tarnal, V., Vlisides, P. E., Janke, E., McKinney, A., Picton, P., Mashour, G. A., & Hudetz, A. G. (2021) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109081 · Cited by 122
“Empirical data suggest that conscious representations are constructed in the cortex (Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Mashour and Hudetz, 2018; Mashour et al., 2020a) and that the entry of sensory inputs to the cortex is controlled or gated by the thalamus (Alkire et al., 2008; Brown et al., 2011;…”
InfluentialSelf-citationAnesthesia and the neurobiology of consciousness
Mashour, G. A. (2024) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2024.03.002 · Cited by 127
Self-citationMelloni, L., Mudrik, L., Pitts, M., Bendtz, K., Ferrante, O., Gorska, U., Hirschhorn, R., Khalaf, A., Kozma, C., Lepauvre, A., et al. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0268577 · Cited by 113
Self-citationDeep learning and the global workspace theory
VanRullen, R., & Kanai, R. (2021) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2021.04.005 · Cited by 128
“Dehaene and colleagues [12–15] proposed a neuronal version of the theory, Global Neuronal Workspace (GNW).”
BackgroundHow does hemispheric specialization contribute to human-defining cognition?
Hartwigsen, G., Bengio, Y., & Bzdok, D. (2021) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2021.04.024 · Cited by 122
Recovery of consciousness and cognition after general anesthesia in humans
Mashour, G. A., Palanca, B. J. A., Basner, M., Li, D., Wang, W., Blain‐Moraes, S., Lin, N., Maier, K. L., Muench, M. R., Tarnal, V., et al. (2021) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.59525 · Cited by 113
Self-citationConsciousness in the cradle: on the emergence of infant experience
Bayne, T., Frohlich, J., Cusack, R., Moser, J., & Naci, L. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.08.018 · Cited by 106
“[123] predicts with respect to the emergence of consciousness.”
BackgroundThalamic contributions to the state and contents of consciousness
Whyte, C. J., Redinbaugh, M. J., Shine, J. M., & Saalmann, Y. B. (2024) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2024.04.019 · Cited by 105
Attention for action in visual working memory
Olivers, C. N. L., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2020) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2020.07.011 · Cited by 105
Self-citationRaccah, O., Block, N., & Fox, K. C. R. (2021) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1141-20.2020 · Cited by 96
“2), and various models of the PFC and consciousness often propose prominent roles for areas other than the lateral PFC (Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Brown et al., 2019; Mashour et al., 2020).”
BackgroundInfluentialFrancken, J. C., Beerendonk, L., Molenaar, D., Fahrenfort, J. J., Kiverstein, J. D., Seth, A. K., & van Gaal, S. (2022) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niac011 · Cited by 136
Global Workspace Theory (GWT) and Prefrontal Cortex: Recent Developments
Baars, B. J., Geld, N., & Kozma, R. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.749868 · Cited by 99
“GWT started in the 1980s as a purely psychological theory of conscious cognition, and has become a prominent approach in scientific studies of consciousness (Mashour et al., 2020).”
BackgroundConsciousness depends on integration between parietal cortex, striatum, and thalamus
Afrasiabi, M., Redinbaugh, M. J., Phillips, J. M., Kambi, N. A., Mohanta, S., Raz, A., Haun, A., & Saalmann, Y. B. (2021) · Cell Systems · doi:10.1016/j.cels.2021.02.003 · Cited by 95
“In GNW, consciousness depends on an “ignition” process through which information becomes globally available via top-down signaling from frontal cortex to specialized processors in more posterior cortex (Figure S1B) (Mashour et al., 2020; Sergent and Dehaene, 2004).”
BackgroundThe feasibility of artificial consciousness through the lens of neuroscience
Aru, J., Larkum, M. E., & Shine, J. M. (2023) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2023.09.009 · Cited by 98
The Architecture of Human Memory: Insights from Human Single-Neuron Recordings
Rutishauser, U., Reddy, L., Mormann, F., & Sarnthein, J. (2020) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1648-20.2020 · Cited by 85
“Also, this long latency is what is expected from a stimulus that has risen into awareness (Mashour et al., 2020) and is concordant with the known response latencies of memory-related ERPs (Mormann et al., 2005).”
ResultColombo, M., & Piccinini, G. (2023) · doi:10.1017/9781009183734 · Cited by 106
Rare long-range cortical connections enhance human information processing
Deco, G., Perl, Y. S., Vuust, P., Tagliazucchi, E., Kennedy, H., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2021) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2021.07.064 · Cited by 95
“The high-efficiency cortical core has been speculated to provide the structural underpinnings of the globalworkspace hypothesis,(58,59) which proposes that recurrent processing in the core allows amplification and globalization of conscious states.(2,47,60) These results also provide important underpinnings for other…”
BackgroundMinimal physicalism as a scale-free substrate for cognition and consciousness
Fields, C., Glazebrook, J. F., & Levin, M. G. (2021) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niab013 · Cited by 99
“2020), in particular, implement state-broadcasting functions analogous, at the cellular level, to the broadcasting functions of long-distance connections between network hubs in global neuronal workspace (GNW) models (Dehaene and Naccache 2001; Baars and Franklin 2003; Wallace 2005; Baars et al. 2013; Dehaene et al. 2…”
BackgroundEmergent reliability in sensory cortical coding and inter-area communication
Ebrahimi, S., Lecoq, J. A., Rumyantsev, O., Tasci, T., Zhang, Y., Irimia, C., Li, J., Ganguli, S., & Schnitzer, M. J. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04724-y · Cited by 95
The predictive global neuronal workspace: a formal active inference model of visual consciousness
Whyte, C. J., & Smith, R. (2021) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2020.101918 · Cited by 84
Explanatory profiles of models of consciousness - towards a systematic classification
Signorelli, C. M., Szczotka, J., & Prentner, R. (2021) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niab021 · Cited by 91
“Some authors interpret these results as evidence of posterior zones for phenomenal consciousness and support of IIT, while others view them as a clear evidence of the role of prefrontal cortex and GNW (Mashour et al. 2020).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialThe mnemonic basis of subjective experience
Lau, H. C., Michel, M., LeDoux, J. E., & Fleming, S. M. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00068-6 · Cited by 92
An adversarial collaboration to critically evaluate theories of consciousness
Cogitate Consortium, Ferrante, O., Gorska-Klimowska, U., Henin, S., Hirschhorn, R., Khalaf, A., Lepauvre, A., Liu, L., Richter, D., Vidal, Y., et al. (2023) · doi:10.1101/2023.06.23.546249 · Cited by 86
Self-citationNeural Organoids and the Precautionary Principle
Birch, J., & Browning, H. (2021) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2020.1845858 · Cited by 88
Confidence in consciousness research
Michel, M. (2022) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science · doi:10.1002/wcs.1628 · Cited by 91
“…are outputs of largely overlapping (meta)cognitive systems in prefrontal cortex (Dehaene et al. 2001; Del Cul et al. 2009; Fleming et al. 2014; Mashour et al. 2020; Mazor et al. 2021; Michel & Morales, 2019; Rahnev et al., 2016; Rounis et al. 2010; Shekhar & Rahnev, 2018; van Vugt et al.…”
BackgroundTheory of the Multiregional Neocortex: Large-Scale Neural Dynamics and Distributed Cognition
Wang, X.-J. (2022) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-110920-035434 · Cited by 83
“The unexpectedly observed threshold for access to the PFC in the model resembles the so-called ignition phenomenon postulated by the theory of GNW for access consciousness (Baars 1988, Dehaene et al. 2003, Mashour et al. 2020) (Figure 6c).”
BackgroundFarnes, N., Juel, B. E., Nilsen, A. S., Romundstad, L. G., & Storm, J. F. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0242056 · Cited by 88
“Unlike “typical” general anaesthetics, ketamine also preserves wake-like levels of PCI [13], and alternating wake-like and low levels of signal diversity [5].”
BackgroundInfluentialDebunking a myth: plant consciousness
Mallatt, J. M., Blatt, M. R., Draguhn, A., Robinson, D. G., & Taiz, L. (2020) · PROTOPLASMA · doi:10.1007/s00709-020-01579-w · Cited by 90
“The consensus of opinion among those who study consciousness in animals is that it depends on information integration that involves extensive feedback, or reciprocal (recurrent) communication, between the conductive neurons (Lamme 2006; Feinberg and Mallatt 2018; Koch 2019; Mashour et al. 2020).”
BackgroundEvidence accumulation relates to perceptual consciousness and monitoring
Pereira, M., Mégevand, P., Tan, M. X., Chang, W., Wang, S., Rezai, A. R., Seeck, M., Corniola, M. V., Momjian, S., Bernasconi, F., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-23540-y · Cited by 109
Roelfsema, P. R. (2023) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2023.03.016 · Cited by 85
“This conjecture would explain why we consciously perceive integrated object representations rather than disconnected feature sets (recently reviewed by Mashour et al. 151 ).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDellert, T., Müller-Bardorff, M., Schloßmacher, I., Pitts, M. A., Hofmann, D., Bruchmann, M., & Straube, T. (2021) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2799-20.2021 · Cited by 85
“Critically, most previous research on NCCs has systematically confounded consciousness with processes that precede or follow the experience, for example, introspection, self-monitoring, and reporting (Aru et al., 2012).”
InfluentialUnpacking the complexities of consciousness: Theories and reflections
Mudrik, L., Boly, M., Dehaene, S., Fleming, S. M., Lamme, V., Seth, A., & Melloni, L. (2025) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106053 · Cited by 81
“…Debate," featuring proponents of four theories: Stanislas Dehaene presented the Global Neuronal Workspace Theory (GNWT; Dehaene and Naccache, 2001; Mashour et al., 2020), Melanie Boly presented the Integrated Information Theory (IIT; Albantakis et al., 2023; Tononi, 2008), Stephen Fleming…”
Self-citationPrefrontal cortex as a key node in arousal circuitry
Mashour, G. A., Pal, D., & Brown, E. N. (2022) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2022.07.002 · Cited by 83
“By contrast, frameworks such as the global neuronal workspace theory posit a critical role for the PFC not as the source of consciousness per se (as in some higher-order thought theories [4]), but as a key node that activates a reverberant cortical–cortical network that sustains, amplifies, and makes sensory represent…”
MethodSelf-citationApical drive-A cellular mechanism of dreaming?
Aru, J., Siclari, F., Phillips, W. A., & Storm, J. F. (2020) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.09.018 · Cited by 74
Park, B., de Wael, R. V., Paquola, C., Larivière, S., Benkarim, O. M., Royer, J., Tavakol, S., Rodríguez‐Cruces, R., Li, Q., Valk, S. L., et al. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117429 · Cited by 67
“Contemporary perspectives on brain wide information processing often focus on the process through which sensorimotor inputs gain access to a global workspace that allows these information to be processed in an explicit conscious manner (Dehaene et al., 1998; Mashour et al., 2020).”
BackgroundVisual mental imagery in typical imagers and in aphantasia: A millimeter-scale 7-T fMRI study
Liu, J., Zhan, M., Hajhajate, D., Spagna, A., Dehaene, S., Cohen, L., & Bartolomeo, P. (2025) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2025.01.013 · Cited by 94
Self-citationFrom Generative Models to Generative Passages: A Computational Approach to (Neuro) Phenomenology
Ramstead, M. J. D., Seth, A. K., Hesp, C., Sandved-Smith, L., Mago, J., Lifshitz, M., Pagnoni, G., Smith, R. S., Dumas, G., Antoine Lutz, A., et al. (2022) · Review of Philosophy and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s13164-021-00604-y · Cited by 100
“Of note is that the present approach and target of explanation should be thought of as distinct from the target of explanation in other, closely related research on the neural correlates of consciousness (e.g., Mashour et al. 2020).”
ResultA Connectomic Hypothesis for the Hominization of the Brain
Changeux, J., Goulas, A., & Hilgetag, C. C. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaa365 · Cited by 80
“Its experimental predictions have been recently reviewed and compared with those of the IIT (Mashour et al. 2020).”
BackgroundResultSelf-citationNobre, A. C., & van Ede, F. (2023) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2023.02.032 · Cited by 76
Nonequilibrium brain dynamics as a signature of consciousness
Perl, Y. S., Bocaccio, H., Pallavicini, C., Ipiña, I. P., Laureys, S., Laufs, H., Kringelbach, M. L., Deco, G., & Tagliazucchi, E. (2021) · Physical review. E · doi:10.1103/physreve.104.014411 · Cited by 80
“For example, the global workspace theory posits that consciousness is equivalent to the nonlinear and flexible percolation of sensory information throughout an anatomical connectivity backbone [25].”
BackgroundPerl, Y. S., Pallavicini, C., Ipiña, I. P., Athena Demertzi, A., Bonhomme, V. L., Martial, C., Panda, R., Annen, J., Ibáñez, A. M., Kringelbach, M. L., et al. (2021) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009139 · Cited by 71
Decoding perceptual awareness across the brain with a no-report fMRI masking paradigm
Hatamimajoumerd, E., Murty, N. A. R., Pitts, M. A., & Cohen, M. A. (2022) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.07.068 · Cited by 78
“For example, cognitive theories can easily account for the lack of neural response in the no-report paradigm using univariate measurements (Figures 3 and 4) by claiming that such measurements are simply not sensitive enough to highlight the critical role of the frontal lobe in conscious processing.”
Luppi, A. I., Golkowski, D., Ranft, A., Ilg, R., Jordan, D., Menon, D. K., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2021) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25405 · Cited by 62
Distinct EEG signatures differentiate unconsciousness and disconnection during anaesthesia and sleep
Casey, C. P., Tanabe, S., Farahbakhsh, Z., Parker, M., Bo, A., White, M., Ballweg, T., Mcintosh, A., Filbey, W., Saalmann, Y., et al. (2022) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1016/j.bja.2022.01.010 · Cited by 66
Blum, L., & Blum, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2115934119 · Cited by 70
“Turing’s simple computer model led neuroscientist Warren S. McCulloch and mathematician Walter Pitts to define their formal neuron, itself a simple model of a neuron (McCulloch & Pitts, 1943).”
MethodDynamic changes in brain lateralization correlate with human cognitive performance
Wu, X., Kong, X., Vatansever, D., Liu, Z., Zhang, K., Sahakian, B. J., Robbins, T. W., Feng, J., Thompson, P. M., & Zhang, J. (2022) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001560 · Cited by 72
Where’s My Consciousness-Ometer? How to Test for the Presence and Complexity of Consciousness
Hunt, T., Ericson, M., & Schooler, J. W. (2022) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916211029942 · Cited by 69
“Note that in a recent review article, Dehaene addressed this debate: “It remains unclear whether P3b is correlated with awareness . . . , post-perceptual processes . . . , or both” (Mashour et al., 2020, p. 780).”
BackgroundPanda, R., Thibaut, A., López‐González, A., Escrichs, A., Bahri, M. A., Hillebrand, A., Deco, G., Laureys, S., Gosseries, O., Annen, J., et al. (2022) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.77462 · Cited by 69
Dendritic integration theory: A thalamo-cortical theory of state and content of consciousness
Bachmann, T., Suzuki, M., & Aru, J. (2020) · Philosophy and the Mind Sciences · doi:10.33735/phimisci.2020.ii.52 · Cited by 61
“Perhaps this change of perspective was caused by the fact that with microelectrode recordings and fMRI much evidence could be gathered about the role of cortical areas in consciousness (for review see Koch et al., 2016; Mashour et al., 2020).”
BackgroundInfluentialDuerler, P., Brem, S., González, G. F., Neef, T., Allen, M., Zeidman, P., Stämpfli, P., Vollenweider, F. X., & Preller, K. H. (2021) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab202 · Cited by 67
“Our results showing that Psi alters activity primarily in frontal brain areas but not somatosensory brain regions during tactile deviancy processing are also in line with recent formulations of the Global Neuronal Workspace Theory suggesting that higher-level areas such as the PFC play a key role for global broadcasti…”
ResultHuman high-order thalamic nuclei gate conscious perception through the thalamofrontal loop
Fang, Z., Dang, Y., Ping, A., Wang, C., Zhao, Q., Zhao, H., Li, X., & Zhang, M. (2025) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adr3675 · Cited by 73
The human visual system differentially represents subjectively and objectively invisible stimuli
Stein, T., KAISER, D. H., Fahrenfort, J. J., & van Gaal, S. (2021) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001241 · Cited by 61
“Whether activity in this posterior occipito–temporo–parietal “hot zone” [80] is sufficient for awareness, or whether awareness requires additional activity in prefrontal cortex [7,81], is subject of ongoing debate.”
BackgroundDifferential mechanisms underlie trace and delay conditioning in Drosophila
Grover, D., Chen, J., Xie, J. L., Li, J., Changeux, J., & Greenspan, R. J. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04433-6 · Cited by 63
Self-citationConsciousness as a memory system.
Budson, A. E., Richman, K. A., & Kensinger, E. A. (2022) · Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology · doi:10.1097/wnn.0000000000000319 · Cited by 66
Schwitzgebel, E. (2023) · Philosophical Studies · doi:10.1007/s11098-023-02042-1 · Cited by 64
“Global Workspace Theories (Baars, 1988; Dehaene, 2014; Mashour et al., 2020) similarly treat consciousness as a matter of information sharing and availability across the brain.”
BackgroundMetastability demystified — the foundational past, the pragmatic present and the promising future
Hancock, F., Rosas, F. E., Luppi, A. I., Zhang, M., Mediano, P. A. M., Cabral, J., Deco, G., Kringelbach, M. L., Breakspear, M. J., Kelso, J. A. S., et al. (2024) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-024-00883-1 · Cited by 92
Learning and the Evolution of Conscious Agents
Jablonka, E., & Ginsburg, S. (2022) · Biosemiotics · doi:10.1007/s12304-022-09501-y · Cited by 61
Towards a pluralistic neurobiological understanding of consciousness
He, B. J. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.02.001 · Cited by 78
“Like RPT, the global neuronal workspace (GNW) theory [9] has focused on visual awareness in its empirical investigation.”
BackgroundLawn, T., Howard, M. A., Turkheimer, F., Mišić, B., Deco, G., Martins, D., & Dipasquale, O. (2023) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105193 · Cited by 64
“…ignition capacity (i.e., the capacity for a sensory stimulus to trigger self-supporting, transient, metastable, and distributed activity across a network, which is thought to be necessary for it to be consciously experienced (Deco et al., 2021; Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Mashour et al., 2020)).”
Müller, E. J., Munn, B., Redinbaugh, M. J., Lizier, J. T., Breakspear, M. J., Saalmann, Y. B., & Shine, J. M. (2023) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112844 · Cited by 58
Visual mental imagery: Evidence for a heterarchical neural architecture
Spagna, A., Heidenry, Z., Miselevich, M., Lambert, C. J., Eisenstadt, B. E., Tremblay, L., Liu, Z., Liu, J., & Bartolomeo, P. (2023) · Physics of Life Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2023.12.012 · Cited by 73
How Do Living Systems Create Meaning?
Fields, C., & Levin, M. G. (2020) · Philosophies · doi:10.3390/philosophies5040036 · Cited by 59
Luppi, A. I., Cain, J. A., Spindler, L. R. B., Górska, U., Toker, D., Hudson, A. E., Brown, E. N., Diringer, M. N., Stevens, R. D., Massimini, M., et al. (2021) · Neurocritical Care · doi:10.1007/s12028-021-01281-6 · Cited by 62
Materialism and the Moral Status of Animals
Birch, J. (2021) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.1093/pq/pqab072 · Cited by 66
Do Nicotinic Receptors Modulate High-Order Cognitive Processing?
Koukouli, F., & Changeux, J. (2020) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2020.06.001 · Cited by 63
“Mashour and colleagues suggested that LOC is the primary therapeutic action of GA [15].”
InfluentialSelf-citationLocal neuronal relational structures underlying the contents of human conscious experience
Malach, R. (2021) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niab028 · Cited by 53
“This theme is of course most prominent, as its name implies, in the Global Workspace Theory, positing the activation of a global fronto-parietal network as a precondition for conscious experience (Mashour et al. 2020) and in a similar vein high-order thought theories, invoking high-order frontal”
BackgroundCortical and subcortical signatures of conscious object recognition
Levinson, M., Podvalny, E., Baete, S. H., & He, B. J. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-23266-x · Cited by 70
A relational approach to consciousness: categories of level and contents of consciousness
Tsuchiya, N., & Saigo, H. (2021) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niab034 · Cited by 64
Bellet, J., Gay, M., Dwarakanath, A., Jarraya, B., van Kerkoerle, T., Dehaene, S., & Panagiotaropoulos, T. I. (2022) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niac005 · Cited by 57
“2017; Marti and Dehaene 2017) and the ignition postulated in the GNW theory of consciousness (Mashour et al. 2020).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDifferential effects of propofol and ketamine on critical brain dynamics
Varley, T. F., Sporns, O., Puce, A., & Beggs, J. M. (2020) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008418 · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Mashour, G. A., Roelfsema, P., Changeux, J.-P., & Dehaene, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience (NL)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Université Paris-Sud (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Changeux, Jean-Pierre
- Dehaene, Stanislas
- Venue
- Neuron
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-03
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 776-798
- ISSN
- 0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8770991
- OpenAlex
- W3009555114
- Cited by
- 1,164
- References
- 260
- Citations by year
- 2026: 269 · 2025: 197 · 2024: 209 · 2023: 163 · 2022: 159 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 58
- FWCI
- 17.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Neuron (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- KNAW research portal (Royal Academy of Art and Sciences (KNAW)) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- consciousness, conscious processing, recurrent processing, neural representations, general anesthesia, attention, working memory, neural correlates of consciousness
- MeSH terms
- Anesthesia, General, Attention, Brain, Cognition, Consciousness, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Neurons, Psychological Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
