Intra- and inter-brain synchrony oscillations underlying social adjustment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans naturally synchronize their behavior with other people. However, although it happens almost automatically, adjusting behavior and conformity to others is a complex phenomenon whose neural mechanisms are still yet to be understood entirely. The present experiment aimed to study the oscillatory synchronization mechanisms underlying automatic dyadic convergence in an EEG hyperscanning experiment. Thirty-six people performed a cooperative decision-making task where dyads had to guess the correct position of a point on a line. A reinforcement learning algorithm was used to model different aspects of the participants' behavior and their expectations of their peers. Intra- and inter-connectivity among electrode sites were assessed using inter-site phase clustering in three main frequency bands (theta, alpha, beta) using a two-level Bayesian mixed-effects modeling approach. The results showed two oscillatory synchronization dynamics related to attention and executive functions in alpha and reinforcement learning in theta. In addition, inter-brain synchrony was mainly driven by beta oscillations. This study contributes preliminary evidence on the phase-coherence mechanism underlying inter-personal behavioral adjustment.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".