Is there collaboration specific neurophysiological activation during collaborative task activity? An analysis of brain responses using electroencephalography and hyperscanning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collaboration between two individuals is thought to be associated with the synchrony of two different brain activities. Indeed, prefrontal cortical activation and alpha frequency band modulation has been widely reported, but little is known about interbrain synchrony (IBS) changes occurring during social interaction such as collaboration or competition. In this study, we assess the dynamic of IBS variation in order to provide novel insights into the frequency band modulation underlying collaboration. To address this question, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to simultaneously record the brain activity of two individuals playing a computer-based game facing four different conditions: collaboration, competition, single participation, and passive observation. The computer-based game consisted of a fast button response task. Using data recorded in sensor space, we calculated an IBS value for each frequency band using both wavelet coherence transform and phase-locking value and performed single-subject analysis to compare each condition. We found significant IBS in frontal electrodes only present during collaboration associated with alpha frequency band modulation. In addition, we observed significant IBS in the theta frequency band for both collaboration and competition conditions, along with a significant single-subject cortical activity. Competition is distinguishable through single-subject activity in several regions and frequency bands of the brain. Performance is correlated with single-subject frontal activation during collaboration in the alpha and beta frequency band.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it