Functional MRI responses to naturalistic stimuli are increasingly typical across early childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While findings show that throughout development, there are child- and age-specific patterns of brain functioning, there is also evidence for significantly greater inter-individual response variability in young children relative to adults. It is currently unclear whether this increase in functional "typicality" (i.e., inter-individual similarity) is a developmental process that occurs across early childhood, and what changes in BOLD response may be driving changes in typicality. We collected fMRI data from 81 typically developing 4-8-year-old children during passive viewing of age-appropriate television clips and asked whether there is increasing typicality of brain response across this age range. We found that the "increasing typicality" hypothesis was supported across many regions engaged by passive viewing. Post hoc analyses showed that in a priori ROIs related to language and face processing, the strength of the group-average shared component of activity increased with age, with no concomitant decline in residual signal or change in spatial extent or variability. Together, this suggests that increasing inter-individual similarity of functional responses to audiovisual stimuli is an important feature of early childhood functional brain development.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".