MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Responsibility modulates neural mechanisms of outcome processing: An ERP study

2011· article· en· W2113235895 on OpenAlex
Peng Li, Chunhui Han, Yi Lei, Clay B. Holroyd, Hong Li

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAttributionOutcome (game theory)ControllabilityTask (project management)CognitionEvent-related potentialSense of agencySocial psychologyCognitive neuroscienceMoral responsibilitySocial neuroscienceProcess (computing)Cognitive psychologyNeuroscienceSocial cognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of personal responsibility in decision-making and its influence on the outcome evaluation process have been investigated relatively rarely in cognitive neuroscience. The present event-related brain potential (ERP) study manipulated the subjective sense of responsibility by modifying outcome controllability in a gambling task. Participants reported a higher sense of responsibility and produced a larger fERN when they were told that the game was 'controllable' compared with when they were told that the game was 'uncontrollable.' In addition, fERN amplitude was correlated with individual self-reports of personal responsibility over the outcomes. These results indicate that self-attribution of responsibility associated with different degrees of controllability affects the outcome evaluation process and fERN amplitude.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.306
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.123 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it