Subjective difficulty in a verbal recognition-based memory task: Exploring brain-behaviour relationships at the individual level in healthy young adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vast majority of fMRI studies of task-related brain activity utilize common levels of task demands and analyses that rely on the central tendencies of the data. This approach does not take into account perceived difficulty nor regional variations in brain activity between people. The results are findings of brain-behavior relationships that weaken as sample sizes increase. Participants of the current study included twenty-six healthy young adults evenly split between the sexes. The current work utilizes five parametrically modulated levels of memory load centered around each individual's predetermined working memory cognitive capacity. Principal components analyses (PCA) identified the group-level central tendency of the data. After removing the group effect from the data, PCA identified individual-level patterns of brain activity across the five levels of task demands. Expression of the group effect significantly differed between the sexes across all load levels. Expression of the individual level patterns demonstrated a significant load by sex interaction. Furthermore, expressions of the individual maps make better predictors of response time behavior than group-derived maps. We demonstrated that utilization of an individual's unique pattern of brain activity in response to increasing a task's perceived difficulty is a better predictor of brain-behavior relationships than study designs and analyses focused on identification of group effects. Furthermore, these methods facilitate exploration into how individual differences in patterns of brain activity relate to individual differences in behavior and cognition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".