MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883160429 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0201128

Non-invasive brain stimulation in information systems research: A proof-of-concept study

2018· article· en· W2883160429 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurence Dumont, Félix Larochelle‐Brunet, Hugo Théoret, René Riedl‬, Sylvain Sénécal, Pierre‐Majorique Léger

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHEC Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationStimulationDorsolateral prefrontal cortexBrain stimulationNeuroscienceAnterior cingulate cortexInsulaPsychologyMedicinePrefrontal cortexCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the founding experiments in the field of Neuro-Information-Systems (NeuroIS), which aims at exploring the neural correlates of the technology acceptance model, suggests that perceived ease of use (PEoU) is associated with activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) while perceived usefulness is associated with activity in the insula, caudate nucleus and anterior cingulate cortex. To further assess the link between DLPFC and PEoU, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was applied over bilateral DLPFC (F3 and F4) immediately before an online shopping task. Forty-two participants were divided in three stimulation groups: left anodal/right cathodal, left cathodal/right anodal and sham. No change in PEoU was observed post stimulation but participants in the left anodal/right cathodal stimulation group took longer to make a purchase compared to sham stimulation and had different visual fixation patterns over the buy buttons. This is, to our knowledge, the first use of non-invasive brain stimulation in the field of NeuroIS. Although the involvement of DLPFC in PEoU could not be confirmed, the present study suggests that non-invasive brain stimulation may be a useful research tool in NeuroIS.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.131 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207