Age-related differences in brain activity underlying identification of emotional expressions in faces
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used fMRI to explore brain activity in young and old adults, while they viewed and labeled faces expressing different emotions as well as neutral expressions. Older adults had significantly greater difficulty identifying expressions of sadness, anger and disgust than young adults. Both groups performed at ceiling for happy expressions. The functional neuroimaging data revealed that both young and old adults recruited a pattern of activity that distinguished happy expressions from all other expressions, but the patterns were age-specific. Older adults showed increased activity in ventromedial prefrontal cortex, lingual gyrus and premotor cortex for happy expressions, whereas younger adults recruited a more widely distributed set of regions including the amgydala, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, lateral prefrontal regions and bilateral inferior parietal and superior temporal areas. Conversely, younger adults showed more activity in the dorsal anterior cingulate for other types of expressions, and older adults had more activity in dorsal cingulate, as well as middle and inferior frontal gyri, somatosensory cortex, insula and middle temporal regions. These results support previous research demonstrating age differences in brain activity during emotional processing, and suggest possible age-related differences in cognitive strategy during identification of happy faces, despite no effect of age on this ability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it