Default Network is Associated with Wise Advising from the 2nd- but not the 3rd- Person Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Providing advice to others is an important component of wisdom. We conducted a study to test the hypothesis that the Default Mode Network (DMN) is associated with wisdom when advising from a self-referential perspective. This is due to the involvement of the DMN in reflecting on personal life experiences. Altogether, 52 healthy Chinese adults provided advice on various life dilemmas using a second- or third-person perspective after receiving a resting-state functional MRI scan. The amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF) was measured in regions of the DMN and the whole brain during resting states. Moreover, trained raters rated the participants' advice on three wisdom subcomponents (i.e., metacognitive humility (MH), meta-level flexibility, and perspective-taking). The results showed that participants felt a significantly smaller psychological distance from the second- than the third-person perspective when advising protagonists on life dilemmas. Relatedly, the rostral ACC was significantly more associated with MH when advising from the second-person perspective, while the dorsal ACC was more associated with MH from the third-person perspective. The precuneus and calcarine showed significantly greater association with perspective-taking from the second- than the third-person perspective. Therefore, wise advising from distinct perspectives and psychological distances may be differentiated in the brain.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".