MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747205981 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10389-9

How spontaneous brain activity and narcissistic features shape social interaction

2017· article· en· W2747205981 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea Scalabrini, Zirui Huang, Clara Mucci, Mauro Gianni Perrucci, Antonio Ferretti, Andrea Fossati, Gian Luca Romani, Georg Northoff, Sjoerd Ebisch

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer sciencePsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing interest in how ongoing spontaneous brain activity and personality provide a predisposition for the processing of environmental demands. It further has been suggested that the brain has an inherent sensitivity to the social environment. Here we tested in healthy volunteers if spontaneous brain activity contributes to a predisposition for social behavior and how this is modulated by narcissistic personality features associated with poor interpersonal functioning. Functional magnetic resonance imaging included a resting state and an experimental paradigm focusing on the anticipation of actively touching an animate (human hand) versus an inanimate target (mannequin hand). The experimental task induced a significant modulation of neural activity in left postcentral gyrus (PostCG), right culmen and, co-varying with narcissistic features, in right anterior insula (AI). Neural activity in anticipation of the animate target significantly correlated with spontaneous activity during the resting state indexed by the Power Law Exponent (PLE) in PostCG and AI. Finally, the correlation between spontaneous and task-induced activity in AI was mediated by narcissistic features. These findings provide novel evidence for a relationship between intrinsic brain activity and social behavior and show how personality could contribute to individual differences in our predisposition to approach the animate world.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207