Culture shapes spontaneous brain dynamics – Shared versus idiosyncratic neural features among Chinese versus Canadian subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental factors, such as culture, are known to shape individual variation in brain activity including spontaneous activity, but less is known about their population-level effects. Eastern and Western cultures differ strongly in their cultural norms about relationships between individuals. For example, the collectivism, interdependence and tightness of Eastern cultures relative to the individualism, independence and looseness of Western cultures, promote interpersonal connectedness and coordination. Do such cultural contexts therefore influence the group-level variability of their cultural members' spontaneous brain activity? Using novel methods adapted from studies of inter-subject neural synchrony, we compare the group-level variability of resting state EEG dynamics in Chinese and Canadian samples. We observe that Chinese subjects show significantly higher inter-subject correlation and lower inter-subject distance in their EEG power spectra than Canadian subjects, as well as lower variability in theta power and alpha peak frequency. We demonstrate, for the first time, different relationships among subjects' resting state brain dynamics in Chinese and Canadian samples. These results point to more idiosyncratic neural dynamics among Canadian participants, compared with more shared neural features in Chinese participants.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".