MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411399509 · doi:10.1016/j.tine.2025.100262

Is mindset related to functional connectivity in motivation-related brain networks: A resting-state fMRI study in adolescents

2025· article· en· W4411399509 on OpenAlexaff
Smiddy Nieuwenhuis, Mariët van Buuren, Tieme W. P. Janssen, Sibel Altikulaç, Miriam Hollarek, Hester Sijtsma, Roger Walsh, Nikki Lee, Nienke van Atteveldt

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Neuroscience and Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilEuropean Research Council
KeywordsResting state fMRIMindsetFunctional connectivityPsychologyNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: the aim of this study was to investigate whole-brain functional connectivity patterns of the reward circuitry and executive control network, and their associations with growth mindset of intelligence in adolescents METHODS: we investigated seed-based functional connectivity of three pre-defined seeds, the caudate and putamen (reward circuitry), and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC; executive control region) in 59 adolescents between 13-16 years old. Growth mindset was used as covariate in the seed-based analysis RESULTS: our findings revealed the expected whole-brain functional connectivity patterns of the three pre-defined seeds. In contrast to the literature, none of these functional connectivity patterns between the seeds and all other voxels of the brain were related to growth mindset CONCLUSION: the current study suggests that the neural representation of a growth mindset is not consistently observed in resting-state neural connectivity and might depend on contextual or cultural differences.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Neuroscience and EducationSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207