MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123875917 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049956

Personality Functioning and the Cortical Midline Structures – An Exploratory fMRI Study

2012· article· en· W2123875917 on OpenAlexaff
Stephan Doering, Björn Enzi, Cornelius Faber, Jens Hinrichs, Judith Bahmer, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchPersonalityPsychologyCognitive psychologyMedicineNeuroscienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Recent neuroscience studies explored the neuronal mechanisms underlying our sense of self. Thereby the cortical midline structures and their anterior and posterior regions have been shown to be central. What remains unclear though is how both, self and cortical midline structures, are related to the identity of the self which is of central importance in especially personality disorders. METHODS: Conducting an exploratory study with a dimensional approach, we here compared subjects with high and low level of personality functioning and identity integration as measured in a standardized way in fMRI during both, emotion- and reward-related tasks. RESULTS: Low levels of personality functioning and identity integration were predicted by significantly decreased degrees of deactivation in the anterior and posterior cortical midline structures. CONCLUSIONS: Though exploratory our results show for the first time direct relationship between cortical midline structures and personality functioning in terms of identity integration. This does not only contribute to our understanding of the neuronal mechanism underlying self and identity but carries also major implications for the treatment of patients with personality disorders.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207