MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388705980 · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2023.103600

The self and our perception of its synchrony – Beyond internal and external cognition

2023· article· en· W4388705980 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea Scalabrini, Michelangelo De Amicis, Agostino Brugnera, Marco Cavicchioli, Yasir Çatal, Kaan Keskin, Javier Gómez Pilar, Jianfeng Zhang, Bella Osipova, Angelo Compare, Andrea Greco, Francesco Benedetti, Clara Mucci, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenueConsciousness and Cognition · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHorizon 2020Canadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean CommissionPaul Scherrer InstitutUniversità degli studi di Bergamo
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionCognitionCognitive psychologySelfDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self is the core of our mental life which connects one's inner mental life with the external perception. Since synchrony is a key feature of the biological world and its various species, what role does it play for humans? We conducted a large-scale psychological study (n = 1072) combining newly developed visual analogue scales (VAS) for the perception of synchrony and internal and external cognition complemented by several psychological questionnaires. Overall, our findings showed close connection of the perception of synchrony of the self with both internal (i.e., body and cognition) and external (i.e., others, environment/nature) synchrony being associated positively with adaptive and negatively with maladaptive traits of self. Moreover, we have demonstrated how external (i.e., life events like the COVID-19 pandemic) variables modulate the perception of the self's internal-external synchrony. These findings suggest how synchrony with self plays a central role during times of uncertainty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.369
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConsciousness and CognitionSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207