MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Line bisection as a neural marker of approach motivation

2010· article· en· W2167317820 on OpenAlex

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 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyElectroencephalographyBisectionCognitive psychologyTask (project management)Brain activity and meditationPrefrontal cortexAlpha (finance)Developmental psychologyNeuroscienceCognitionPsychometricsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approach motivation has been reliably associated with relative left prefrontal brain activity as measured with electroencephalography (EEG). Motivation researchers have increasingly used the line bisection task, a behavioral measure of relative cerebral asymmetry, as a neural index of approach motivation-related processes. Despite its wide adoption, however, the line bisection task has not been confirmed as a valid measure of the precise pattern of activity linked to approach motivation. In two studies, we demonstrate that line bisection bias is specifically related to baseline, approach-related, prefrontal EEG alpha asymmetry (Study 1) and is heightened by the same situational factors that heighten the same approach-related prefrontal EEG alpha asymmetry (Study 2). Results support the line bisection task as an efficient and unobtrusive behavioral neuroscience measure of approach motivation.

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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · 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