Contrastive analysis has been widely employed in the search for the electrophysiological neural correlates of consciousness. However, despite its clear logic, it has been argued that it may not succeed in isolating neural processes solely involved in the emergence of perceptual awareness. In fact, data from contrastive analysis would be contaminated by potential confounding factors reflecting distinct, though related, processes either preceding or following the conscious perception. At present, the ERP components representing the proper correlates of perceptual awareness still remain to be identified among those correlating with awareness (i.e., Visual Awareness Negativity, VAN and Late Positivity, LP). In order to dissociate visual awareness from post-perceptual confounds specifically related to decision making, we manipulated the response criterion, which affects how a percept is translated into a decision. In particular, while performing an orientation discrimination task, participants were asked to shift their response criterion across sessions. As a consequence, the resulting modulation should concern the ERP component(s) not exclusively reflecting mechanisms regulating the subjective conscious experience itself but rather the processes accompanying it. Electrophysiological results showed that N1 and P3 were sensitive to the response criterion adopted by participants. Additionally, the more the participants shifted their response criterion, the bigger the ERP modulation was; this was consequently indicative of the critical role of these components in the decision-making processes regardless of awareness level. When considering data independently from the response criterion, the aware vs. unaware contrast showed that both VAN and LP were significant. Crucially, the LP component was also modulated by the interaction of awareness and response criterion, while VAN results to be unaffected. In agreement with previous literature, these findings provide evidence supporting the hypothesis that VAN tracks the emergence of visual awareness by encoding the conscious percept, whereas LP reflects the contribution from post-perceptual processes related to response requirements. This excludes a direct functional role of this later component in giving rise to perceptual awareness.

中文翻译：

---

迟到的积极性不符合被视为知觉意识的适当神经关联的标准

对比分析已被广泛用于寻找意识的电生理神经关联。然而，尽管其逻辑清晰，有人认为它可能无法成功地隔离仅与感知意识的出现有关的神经过程。事实上，来自对比分析的数据会被潜在的混杂因素污染，这些因素反映了在有意识知觉之前或之后的不同但相关的过程。目前，在与意识相关的那些（即，视觉意识负性，VAN 和晚期积极性，LP）中，代表知觉意识适当相关性的 ERP 组件仍有待确定。为了将视觉意识与与决策相关的后知觉混淆分开，我们操纵了响应标准，这会影响感知如何转化为决策。特别是，在执行定向歧视任务时，参与者被要求在不同会话中改变他们的反应标准。因此，由此产生的调制应该关注 ERP 组件，不仅反映调节主观意识体验本身的机制，而且还涉及伴随它的过程。电生理结果表明，N1和P3对参与者采用的反应标准敏感。此外，参与者改变他们的反应标准越多，ERP 调制越大；因此，这表明了这些组成部分在决策过程中的关键作用，而不管认识水平如何。当独立于响应标准考虑数据时，有意识与无意识的对比表明 VAN 和 LP 都很重要。至关重要的是，LP 分量也受到意识和响应标准的相互作用的调节，而 VAN 结果不受影响。与先前的文献一致，这些发现提供了支持以下假设的证据，即 VAN 通过编码有意识的感知来跟踪视觉意识的出现，而 LP 反映了与响应要求相关的后感知过程的贡献。这排除了后一个组成部分在引起知觉方面的直接功能作用。LP 分量也受意识和反应标准的相互作用调节，而 VAN 结果不受影响。与先前的文献一致，这些发现提供了支持以下假设的证据，即 VAN 通过编码有意识的感知来跟踪视觉意识的出现，而 LP 反映了与响应要求相关的后感知过程的贡献。这排除了后一个组成部分在引起知觉方面的直接功能作用。LP 分量也受意识和反应标准的相互作用调节，而 VAN 结果不受影响。与先前的文献一致，这些发现提供了支持以下假设的证据，即 VAN 通过编码有意识的感知来跟踪视觉意识的出现，而 LP 反映了与响应要求相关的后感知过程的贡献。这排除了后一个组成部分在引起知觉方面的直接功能作用。