MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387009267 · doi:10.32920/24194724.v1

Effects of Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation on Perception of Dynamic Audio-Visual Emotional Facial Stimuli

2023· preprint· en· W4387009267 on OpenAlexaff
Carmen Dang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionMirror neuronEmotion perceptionCognitionNeuroscienceAudiologyCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human ability to perceive emotions accurately and quickly strengthens social communication and interactions. The human mirror neuron system (hMNS) is a prominent brain network that has been implicated in action perception and more recently, emotion perception. The current study applied transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) to the inferior frontal cortex (IFC; a major node of the hMNS) to assess the neural and behavioural effects. The study also uses dynamic audio-visual portrayals of emotion to increase ecological validity. Compared to the sham group, active tRNS led to greater mu-event-related desynchronization (mu-ERD) to emotional stimuli, marginally faster response time, and significantly decreased accuracy. These results suggest that active tRNS over the IFC leads to a mode of embodied responding to dynamic emotional stimuli that may involve less cognitive deliberation.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207