MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385406163 · doi:10.1007/s10548-023-00987-4

EEG Microstates in Social and Affective Neuroscience

2023· review· en· W4385406163 on OpenAlexaff
Bastian Schiller, Matthias F. J. Sperl, Tobias Kleinert, Kyle Nash, Lorena R. R. Gianotti

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Topography · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEuropean Research Council
KeywordsElectroencephalographySocial neurosciencePsychologyFacial expressionPerceptionCognitive psychologyCognitionField (mathematics)Cognitive neuroscienceGazeSocial cognitionNeuroscienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social interactions require both the rapid processing of multifaceted socio-affective signals (e.g., eye gaze, facial expressions, gestures) and their integration with evaluations, social knowledge, and expectations. Researchers interested in understanding complex social cognition and behavior face a "black box" problem: What are the underlying mental processes rapidly occurring between perception and action and why are there such vast individual differences? In this review, we promote electroencephalography (EEG) microstates as a powerful tool for both examining socio-affective states (e.g., processing whether someone is in need in a given situation) and identifying the sources of heterogeneity in socio-affective traits (e.g., general willingness to help others). EEG microstates are identified by analyzing scalp field maps (i.e., the distribution of the electrical field on the scalp) over time. This data-driven, reference-independent approach allows for identifying, timing, sequencing, and quantifying the activation of large-scale brain networks relevant to our socio-affective mind. In light of these benefits, EEG microstates should become an indispensable part of the methodological toolkit of laboratories working in the field of social and affective neuroscience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain TopographySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207