The neural correlates of referential communication: Taking advantage of sparse-sampling fMRI to study verbal communication with a real interaction partner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces an innovative functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) protocol to study real verbal interactions while limiting the impact of speech-related movement artefacts. This protocol is based on a sparse sampling acquisition technique and allowed participants to complete a referential communication task with a real interaction partner. During verbal interactions, speakers adjust their verbal productions depending on their interlocutors' knowledge of the referents being mentioned. These adjustments have been linked to theory of mind (ToM), the ability to infer other's mental states. We thus sought to determine if the brain regions supporting ToM would also be activated during a referential communication task in which participants have to present movie characters that vary in their likelihood of being known by their interlocutor. This pilot study establishes that the sparse sampling strategy is a viable option to study the neural correlates of referential communication while minimizing movement artefacts. In addition, the brain regions supporting ToM were recruited during the task, though specifically for the conditions where participants could adjust their verbal productions to the interlocutor's likely knowledge of the referent. This study therefore demonstrates the feasibility and relevance of a sparse-sampling approach to study verbal interactions with fMRI, including referential communication.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".