Effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Medial Prefrontal Cortex in Aesthetic Judgement - eScholarship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Medial Prefrontal Cortex in Aesthetic Judgement Leila Azari Pishkenari Ecole de psychologie - Universit´e Laval Hamed Ekhtiari Iranian Institute for Cognitive Sciences Studies (ICSS). Javad Hatami university of Tehran, Tehran, Tehran, Iran, Islamic Republic of Abstract: Introduction: Among various brain regions involved in aesthetic judgment, Medial prefrontal cortex has a pivotal role in judging the beauty of visual stimuli. It seems that this region’s influence in aesthetic preference is an effect of its role in affective processes. In the following study, we have used transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in order to evaluate the role of medial prefrontal cortex in aesthetic judgment. Method: we used three different types of tDCS stimulation, that is, anodal, cathodal, and sham. 36 participants (18 female) undertook in three experimental sessions randomly in which they received 1mA stimulation for 20 min on their medial prefrontal cortex. Active electrodes were located bilaterally on the forehead and the reference electrode was on the right arm. Ten minutes after the onset of stimulation, subjects got involved in the on-line computerized task of the aesthetic judgment. Results: In general, the effect of tDCS on medial prefrontal cortex on aesthetic judgment was significant F(2 & 37.84)=3.89, p=0.029). The results show that anodal stimulation of the medial prefrontal cortex affect the aesthetic preference significantly (p=0.036), while no such effect was seen in cathodal stimulation (p=0.663). There was no sex-related effect (F(1 & 33.48)=3.39, p=0.074). Discussion: Medial prefrontal cortex through its top-down control over affective side of aesthetic preference can reduce the preference.
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 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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".