The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 43 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses
Open accessAbstract
Humans have a striking ability to infer meaning from even the sparsest and most abstract forms of narratives. At the same time, flexibility in the form of a narrative is matched by inherent ambiguity in its interpretation. How does the brain represent subtle, idiosyncratic differences in the interpretation of abstract and ambiguous narratives? In this fMRI study, subjects were scanned either watching a novel 7-min animation depicting a complex narrative through the movement of geometric shapes, or listening to a narration of the animation's social story. Using an intersubject representational similarity analysis that compared interpretation similarity and neural similarity across subjects, we found that the more similar two people's interpretations of the abstract shapes animation were, the more similar were their neural responses in regions of the default mode network (DMN) and fronto-parietal network. Moreover, these shared responses were modality invariant: the shapes movie and the verbal interpretation of the movie elicited shared responses in linguistic areas and a subset of the DMN when subjects shared interpretations. Together, these results suggest a network of high-level regions that are not only sensitive to subtle individual differences in narrative interpretation during naturalistic conditions, but also resilient to large differences in the modality of the narrative.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 43 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, the Audio subjects and the 18 Movie subjects with recalls that were the least similar to the Audio subjects only showed significant neural similarity in a small cluster of voxels in right angular gyrus (p<.05, FWER corrected; Fig. S1B, bottom row).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, Movie subjects differed in their interpretation of a small circle as an inanimate object (e.g. a ball pushed around by the triangle child) or an animate character (e.g. a dog or pet or other animate being).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While recall length did not differ between groups (t(52) = 1.82, p=.073)”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A t-test revealed significant differences between these two ISC maps in bilateral angular gyrus, PMC, and left MTG (Fig 3B, left).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Between stimuli, the average LSA similarity between the Movie group and the Audio group was 0.545 (std=0.125, range=0.26–0.8).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Audio subjects and the 18 Movie subjects with the most similar recalls to the Audio subjects showed significantly correlated neural responses in linguistic areas, including posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) and inferior temporal gyrus (ITG).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In ROI analyses, the 18 subjects with more similar recalls, across modalities, had greater ISC in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and PMC (p<.05; Fig 3B, upper right).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that the level of recall similarity was correlated with the level of neural similarity in PMC, right angular gyrus, right SMG, bilateral anterior STG, bilateral DMPFC, and bilateral DLPFC (q<.05, FDR corrected; Fig. 4).”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“We found that the more similarly two people interpreted the social events depicted in an ambiguous animation, the more similar their neural responses were in a subset of DMN regions, including PMC, right angular gyrus, bilateral STG, and DMPFC.”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“In addition, we observed this relationship in regions outside the DMN, including more anterior right SMG and bilateral DLPFC.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Audio subjects recalled more events than Movie subjects (t(52, 3.19, p=.0024).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on the average recall similarity to each other, the Movie subjects were split into two equal sized groups (N=18 each group): a “high similarity” group (mean similarity = 0.745, std = 0.071, range = 0.58–0.89) and a “low similarity” group (mean similarity = 0.528, std = 0.123, range = .26-.81).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
- It may state two separate claims as one. 18
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was some overlap in participants among the groups: 13 of the Movie subjects were in both the “Movie high similarity” group and the “high similarity to Audio” group, while another 13 subjects were in both the “Movie low similarity” group and the “low similarity to Audio.” The remaining 10 Movie subjects did not overlap.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 13Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the Audio group, the average recall was 221.3 sec (std = 68.8 sec) and described an average 18.5 events (std = 3.1).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 18 Movie subjects with the most similar recalls to each other showed significantly correlated neural responses throughout early visual areas, including much of occipital cortex, and auditory areas including A1+, superior temporal gyrus (STG), and middle temporal gyrus (MTG). Significant ISC was also observed in high-level regions including bilateral angular gyrus, bilateral supramarginal gyrus”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, these shared responses were modality invariant: the shapes movie and the verbal interpretation of the movie elicited shared responses in linguistic areas and a subset of the DMN when subjects shared interpretations.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on average similarity to the Audio group, the subjects in the Movie group were split into a “high interpretation similarity to Audio” group (mean similarity = 0.604, std = 0.059, range=0.48–0.8) and a “low interpretation similarity to Audio” group (mean similarity = 0.395, std = 0.082, range = 0.26–0.64).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the Movie group, the average spoken recall was 177.6 sec (std = 86.6 sec) and described on average 14.4 events (std = 4.8), as rated by an independent coder.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In ROI analyses, we found that interpretation similarity across modalities was significantly correlated with neural similarity across modalities in right DLPFC, PMC, and right angular gyrus (p<.05) with a trending correlation in left DLPC (p=.068) (Fig 5B).”
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
“Moreover, the more similarly someone who watched the abstract shapes animation interpreted the narrative to someone who listened to the audio version of the story, the more similar their neural responses in the ROI analysis of PMC, right DLPFC, and right angular gyrus.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Similarity between subjects' post-viewing descriptions (recall similarity) is a valid measure of similarity in their interpretation of the narrative.
- Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no demographic differences between the two groups (age: t(34)=.11, p>.05; gender: χ2(1)=1.87, p>.05; race: p>.05 all races, max χ2 =.36).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Behavioral results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 18Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These results are consistent with previous studies that directly manipulated interpretation by directing attention to different aspects of a spoken narrative (Cooper et al., 2011), changing perspective (Lahnakoski et al., 2014), or biasing with contextual information (Yeshurun et al., 2017b).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Semantic similarity measured by LSA has been shown to have human-like performance (Landauer et al., 1998).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > Behavioral data analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Landauer et al., 1998 source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A larger sample size for the Movie group was selected based on previous work using ISC to detect differences among conditions (Cooper et al., 2011; Lahnakoski et al., 2014; Schmälzle et al., 2015; Yeshurun et al., 2017b, 2017a).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > Subjects
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 36Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous work has shown that narratives elicit correlated neural responses across subjects in regions of the Default Mode Network (DMN), including temporal parietal junction (TPJ), angular gyrus, temporal poles, posterior medial cortex (PMC), and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) (Hasson et al., 2008, 2010; Jaaskelainen et al., 2008; Wilson et al., 2008; Lerner et al., 2011; Ben-Yakov et al., 2012;”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Introduction
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Motion was not significantly correlated between most subjects (Movie: mean r = 0.071, std=0.08; Movie-Audio: mean r=0.063, std=0.086), though a subset of subjects did show correlated motion (Movie: 84 of 630 pairwise comparisons; Movie-Audio: 74 or 648 pairwise comparisons; all ps<.05, uncorrected for multiple comparisons).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The sample size for the Audio group was based on reliability analyses of sample size required to measure reliable ISC (Pajula and Tohka, 2016).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > Subjects
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pajula and Tohka, 2016
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 18Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Although the DMN is typically defined using resting-state data, recent work has shown that the same network is activated during temporally extended stimuli (Simony et al., 2016).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Simony et al., 2016 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To verify that these findings were not due to correlated subject motion, we extracted a timecourse of each subject’s estimated framewise displacement and then correlated each pair of subject’s motion time course.”
- Also stated in: § MRI data analysis · plain
“Finally, we regressed out each subject’s motion parameters (3 translation, 3 rotation) from their neural response. The residuals from this regression were then used to repeat the above neural analyses.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § MRI data analysis · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because the Movie and Audio were aligned in time such that the start of each event occurs at the same time across, the audio envelopes (audio amplitudes) may be correlated.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Following Honey et al. (2012), for between-condition analyses, we thus projected out the audio envelope from each subject’s neural response.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Honey et al. (2012) source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mean frame-wise displacement during the Movie was 0.083 mm (std=0.03) and for the Audio was 0.072mm (std= 0.31), suggesting excellent participant compliance.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Results > Neural results
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjects with excessive head motion (>3mm absolute movement) were removed from the sample.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This finding extends previous work showing that these regions respond similarly to slightly different pairs of stimuli, for example, individually presented words versus images of the same item (e.g. Chee et al., 2000; Marinkovic et al., 2003; Bruffaerts et al., 2013); spoken versus written sentences, paragraphs or narratives (Spitsyna et al., 2006; Jobard et al., 2007; Lindenberg and Scheef, 2007;”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An independent coder blind to the aim of the study segmented the narrative into 22 separate events and then coded each subject’s recall for a description of each event.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > Behavioral data analysis
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Thus, in order to time-lock the two stimuli, the Movie animation was segmented into 76 short events or actions (e.g. child bounces balls, parent kisses child goodnight, child and friend make a plan). The raw Audio story was edited to match the onset of each event in the animation, following Regev et al. (2013) and Honey et al. (2012) (Fig. 1).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > Stimuli and experimental design
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“These ROIs were defined using functional connectivity on previously published, independent data (Chen et al., 2016) where subjects were scanned in fMRI watching a movie.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Methods > MRI data analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen et al., 2016 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, these results suggest a network of highlevel regions that are not only sensitive to subtle individual differences in narrative interpretation during naturalistic conditions, but also resilient to large differences in the modality of the narrative.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
- Rests on an assumption: Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
In the paper
“In particular, both SMG and DLPFC are part of a proposed FPCN subnetwork, FPCN-A, that has been shown to be more highly correlated with DMN in a variety of tasks ranging from classic cognitive control tasks, resting state, social-cognitive tasks, and movie watching (Dixon et al., 2018).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing outside the DMN
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dixon et al., 2018 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The FPCN is highly, albeit heterogeneously, interconnected with the DMN (Spreng et al., 2010, 2012).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing outside the DMN
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Spreng et al., 2010, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present findings are therefore consistent with DMN as a high-level global integrator, and additionally demonstrates that the temporal patterns within the DMN are sensitive to idiosyncratic differences in narrative interpretation.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing in the default mode network
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The similarity between neural patterns elicited by similar interpretation of the same narrative communicated in different forms (shapes versus words) demonstrates the remarkable modality invariance and strong social nature of the default mode network.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Conclusions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Similarity between subjects' post-viewing descriptions (recall similarity) is a valid measure of similarity in their interpretation of the narrative.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We therefore show that these areas not only respond preferentially to animate films, but can discriminate between subtle differences in interpretations of dynamically occurring social interactions.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing in the default mode network
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both of these regions are part of the frontoparietal control network (FPCN), which is widely implicated in cognitive control and decision-making processes (Vincent et al., 2008).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing outside the DMN
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Vincent et al., 2008 source
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Based on these findings, we have previously suggested that the DMN is situated at the top of a timescale processing hierarchy, integrating high-level information over minutes or more (Hasson et al., 2008; Lerner et al., 2011; Hasson & Honey, 2012).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing in the default mode network
What the sources say
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Notably, the DMN largely overlaps with the mentalizing network (Schilbach et al., 2008; Mars et al., 2012), regions of the brain that show increased activity while thinking about other minds.”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing in the default mode network
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Greater activation was found during animate than inanimate movies in regions of DMN (Castelli et al., 2002; Vanderwal et al., 2008; Schurz et al., 2014).”
§ Shared understanding of narratives is correlated with shared neural responses > Discussion > Processing in the default mode network
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Free recall similarity, as measured by LSA, reflects similarity in narrative interpretation.
“Here, we used LSA to measure similarity of subject recalls within and across the two stimuli.”
“we first constructed a recall similarity matrix using LSA cosine similarity (see Section 2.5), which represents how similarly each pair of subjects interpreted the stimulus.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Free recall descriptions capture subjects' interpretations of the narrative.
“Immediately following stimulus presentation, all subjects were asked to freely describe the stimulus. Based on textual analysis of these free recalls, we then compared recall similarity with neural similarity using both intersubject correlation analysis (ISC) and intersubject representational similarity analysis (RSA).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Similarity between subjects' post-viewing descriptions (recall similarity) is a valid measure of similarity in their interpretation of the narrative.
“We found that the level of recall similarity was correlated with the level of neural similarity in PMC, right angular gyrus, right SMG, bilateral anterior STG, bilateral DMPFC, and bilateral DLPFC (q<.05, FDR corrected; Fig. 4).”
“In ROI analyses, we found that interpretation similarity across modalities was significantly correlated with neural similarity across modalities in right DLPFC, PMC, and right angular gyrus (p<.05) with a trending correlation in left DLPC (p=.068) (Fig 5B).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The observed relationship between recall similarity and neural similarity is not primarily driven by differences in memory performance or attention/arousal.
“Finally, it is possible that differences among the high- and low-recall similarity groups may better reflect differences in memory and performance on the recall task, rather than differences in interpretation.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Greater similarity in the interpretation of the ambiguous shape animation (as reported by each of the participants) was associated with greater similarity in neural response in DMN regions across participants.”
From The default mode network: where the idiosyncratic self meets the shared social world (2021) · cites this paper as [37]
Statistics that don’t add up
Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.
Inconsistent p-value: t(52) = 1.82, p = .073
MinorThe paper reports p = .073 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .075 (two-tailed). The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.
Reported p = .073 · recomputed p = .075
“t(52) = 1.82, p=.073”
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Doesn’t add upt(52) = 1.82reported p = .073 · recomputed p = .075
“t(52) = 1.82, p = .073”
- Consistentt(781) = 22.7reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(781) = 22.7, p < .001”
- Consistentt(34) = 0.11reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .913
“t(34)=.11, p > .05”
- Consistentχ²(1) = 1.87reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .171
“χ2(1)=1.87, p > .05”
- Consistentt(34) = 0.25reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .804
“t(34)=.25, p > .05”
- Consistentt(304) = 0.69reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .491
“t(304)=0.69, p > .05”
- Consistentt(646) = 0.08reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .936
“t(646)=0.08, p > .05”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Cross-modal neural similarity is reported even for the low-similarity group
MinorThe discussion says significant cross-modal neural similarity occurred only when interpretations were shared, but the results report a significant cluster for the group whose recalls were least similar to the Audio group.
“we found that subjects who watched the shapes animation and subjects who listened to the audio story had significantly correlated neural responses only when they shared interpretations of the narrative.”
“In contrast, the Audio subjects and the 18 Movie subjects with recalls that were the least similar to the Audio subjects only showed significant neural similarity in a small cluster of voxels in right angular gyrus (p<.05, FWER corrected; Fig. S1B, bottom row).”
Citations
Cites
Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x · Cited by 109,482
A default mode of brain function
Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.676 · Cited by 12,190
The Brain's Default Network: Anatomy, Function, and Relevance to Disease
Buckner, R. L., Andrews‐Hanna, J. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2008) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1196/annals.1440.011 · Cited by 9,761 · cited 2×
“Many of the regions in which we identify a relationship between interpretation similarity and neural similarity overlap substantially with the DMN (Raichle et al., 2001; Buckner et al., 2008).”
Spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity observed with functional magnetic resonance imaging
Fox, M. D., & Raichle, M. E. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2201 · Cited by 6,700
Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples
Nichols, T. E., & Holmes, A. P. (2002) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.1058 · Cited by 6,256
An introduction to latent semantic analysis
Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638539809545028 · Cited by 4,880
Kleiner, M., Brainard, D. H., & Pelli, D. G. (2007) · MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · Cited by 3,602
Representational similarity analysis-connecting the branches of systems neuroscience
Kriegeskorte, N. (2008) · Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008 · Cited by 3,355
An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1416950 · Cited by 3,340
Situating the default-mode network along a principal gradient of macroscale cortical organization
Margulies, D. S., Ghosh, S. S., Goulas, A., Falkiewicz, M., Huntenburg, J. M., Langs, G., Bezgin, G., Eickhoff, S. B., Castellanos, F. X., Petrides, M., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1608282113 · Cited by 2,321 · cited 1×
“Other work has additionally supported a role of the DMN as a high-level network that flexibly integrates information from many lower-level networks (Vatansever et al., 2015; Margulies et al., 2016; Vidaurre et al., 2017).”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The default mode network: where the idiosyncratic self meets the shared social world
Yeshurun, Y., Nguyen, M., & Hasson, U. (2021) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-020-00420-w · Cited by 682
Self-citationMeasuring shared responses across subjects using intersubject correlation
Nastase, S. A., Gazzola, V., Hasson, U., & Keysers, C. (2019) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsz037 · Cited by 419
Self-citationMovie-watching outperforms rest for functional connectivity-based prediction of behavior
Finn, E. S., & Bandettini, P. A. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.117963 · Cited by 290
Idiosynchrony: From shared responses to individual differences during naturalistic neuroimaging
Finn, E. S., Glerean, E., Khojandi, A., Nielson, D. M., Molfese, P. J., Handwerker, D. A., & Bandettini, P. A. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116828 · Cited by 277
Movies in the magnet: Naturalistic paradigms in developmental functional neuroimaging
Vanderwal, T., Eilbott, J. A., & Castellanos, F. X. (2018) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.10.004 · Cited by 286
Self-citationIntrinsic neural timescales: temporal integration and segregation
Wolff, A., Berberian, N., Golesorkhi, M., Gómez‐Pilar, J., Zilio, F., & Northoff, G. (2022) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2021.11.007 · Cited by 242
The brain and its time: intrinsic neural timescales are key for input processing
Golesorkhi, M., Gomez-Pilar, J., Zilio, F., Berberian, N., Wolff, A., Yagoub, M. C. E., & Northoff, G. (2021) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-021-02483-6 · Cited by 198
Movies and narratives as naturalistic stimuli in neuroimaging
Jääskeläinen, I. P., Sams, M. E., Glerean, E., & Ahveninen, J. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117445 · Cited by 202
A Guide to Representational Similarity Analysis for Social Neuroscience
Popal, H. S., Wang, Y., & Olson, I. R. (2019) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsz099 · Cited by 150
The “Narratives” fMRI dataset for evaluating models of naturalistic language comprehension
Nastase, S. A., Liu, Y., Hillman, H., Zadbood, A., Hasenfratz, L., Keshavarzian, N., Chen, J., Honey, C. J., Yeshurun, Y., Regev, M., et al. (2021) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/s41597-021-01033-3 · Cited by 190
Self-citationA Multi-Brain Framework for Social Interaction
Kingsbury, L., & Hong, W. (2020) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2020.06.008 · Cited by 153
Correlated Neural Activity across the Brains of Socially Interacting Bats
Zhang, W., & Yartsev, M. M. (2019) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.023 · Cited by 143
Interbrain synchrony: on wavy ground
Holroyd, C. B. (2022) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2022.02.002 · Cited by 138
Chen, X., Chen, N.-X., Shen, Y., Li, H., Li, L., Lu, B., Zhu, Z.-C., Fan, Z., & Yan, C. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117185 · Cited by 112
Felice, S. D., Hamilton, A. F. D. C., Ponari, M., & Vigliocco, G. (2022) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2021.0357 · Cited by 178
Chen, P.-H. A., Jolly, E., Cheong, J. H., & Chang, L. J. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116851 · Cited by 109
Information flow across the cortical timescale hierarchy during narrative construction
Chang, C. H. C., Nastase, S. A., & Hasson, U. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2209307119 · Cited by 92
Self-citationSocial cognition in context: A naturalistic imaging approach
Redcay, E., & Moraczewski, D. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116392 · Cited by 100
Conservative and liberal attitudes drive polarized neural responses to political content
Leong, Y. C., Chen, J., Willer, R., & Zaki, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2008530117 · Cited by 92
In-degree centrality in a social network is linked to coordinated neural activity
Baek, E. C., Hyon, R., López, K., Finn, E. S., Porter, M. A., & Parkinson, C. M. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28432-3 · Cited by 93
Meshulam, M., Hasenfratz, L., Hillman, H., Liu, Y., Nguyen, M., Norman, K. A., & Hasson, U. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22202-3 · Cited by 86
Self-citationGruskin, D. C., Rosenberg, M. D., & Holmes, A. J. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116217 · Cited by 86
Finding the neural correlates of collaboration using a three-person fMRI hyperscanning paradigm
Xie, H., Karipidis, I. I., Howell, A. M., Schreier, M., Sheau, K. E., Manchanda, M. K., Ayub, R., Glover, G. H., Jung, M. F., Reiss, A. L., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1917407117 · Cited by 79
A hierarchical model for interpersonal verbal communication
Jiang, J., Zheng, L., & Lu, C. (2020) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsaa151 · Cited by 92
Masís-Obando, R., Norman, K. A., & Baldassano, C. A. (2022) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.70445 · Cited by 78
Synchronized affect in shared experiences strengthens social connection
Cheong, J. H., Molani, Z., Sadhukha, S., & Chang, L. J. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-05461-2 · Cited by 75
What can narratives tell us about the neural bases of human memory?
Lee, H., Bellana, B., & Chen, J. (2020) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.02.007 · Cited by 73
No evidence for differences among language regions in their temporal receptive windows
Blank, I., & Fedorenko, E. G. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116925 · Cited by 74
Hu, X., Wang, F., & Zhang, D. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118819 · Cited by 71
Teacher–student neural coupling during teaching and learning
Nguyen, M., Chang, A. E., Micciche, E. T., Meshulam, M., Nastase, S. A., & Hasson, U. (2021) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsab103 · Cited by 83
Self-citationvan Baar, J. M., Halpern, D. J., & FeldmanHall, O. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2022491118 · Cited by 84
Pan, Y., Cheng, X., & Hu, Y. (2022) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac127 · Cited by 73
The Interpersonal Neuroscience of Social Learning
Pan, Y., Novembre, G., & Olsson, A. (2021) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916211008429 · Cited by 56
Cortical response to naturalistic stimuli is largely predictable with deep neural networks
Khosla, M., Ngo, G. H., Jamison, K. W., Kuceyeski, A. F., & Sabuncu, M. R. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abe7547 · Cited by 60
Song, H., Shim, W. M., & Rosenberg, M. D. (2023) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.85487 · Cited by 69
Ongoing Brain Activity and Its Role in Cognition: Dual versus Baseline Models
Northoff, G., Vatansever, D., Scalabrini, A., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2022) · The Neuroscientist · doi:10.1177/10738584221081752 · Cited by 56
Relational neuroscience: Insights from hyperscanning research
Felice, S. D., Chand, T., Croy, I., Engert, V., Goldstein, P., Holroyd, C. B., Kirsch, P., Krach, S., Ma, Y., Scheele, D., et al. (2024) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105979 · Cited by 72
Lonely Individuals Process the World in Idiosyncratic Ways
Baek, E. C., Hyon, R., López, K., Du, M., Porter, M. A., & Parkinson, C. M. (2023) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/09567976221145316 · Cited by 57
Neural patterns differentiate traumatic from sad autobiographical memories in PTSD
Perl, O., Duek, O. A., Kulkarni, K. R., Kelmendi, B., Amen, S. L., Gordon, C., Krystal, J. H., Levy, I., Harpaz‐Rotem, I., & Schiller, D. (2023) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01483-5 · Cited by 61
Saalasti, S., Alho, J., Bar, M., Glerean, E., Honkela, T., Kauppila, M., Sams, M., & Jääskeläinen, I. P. (2019) · Brain and Behavior · doi:10.1002/brb3.1288 · Cited by 50
Hyon, R., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Parkinson, C. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116492 · Cited by 49
Do you hear what I hear? Perceived narrative constitutes a semantic dimension for music
McAuley, J. D., Wong, P. C. M., Mamidipaka, A., Phillips, N. A., & Margulis, E. H. (2021) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104712 · Cited by 47
Mapping brain function during naturalistic viewing using high-density diffuse optical tomography
Fishell, A. K., Burns‐Yocum, T. M., Bergonzi, K. M., Eggebrecht, A. T., & Culver, J. P. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-45555-8 · Cited by 45
Consensus-building conversation leads to neural alignment
Sievers, B., Welker, C. L., Hasson, U., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Wheatley, T. P. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43253-8 · Cited by 69
Self-citationIndividualized psychiatric imaging based on inter-subject neural synchronization in movie watching
Yang, Z., Wu, J., Xu, L., Deng, Z.-Z., Tang, Y., Gao, J., Hu, Y., Zhang, Y., Qin, S., Li, C., et al. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116227 · Cited by 44
Li, Y., Chen, M., Zhang, R., & Li, X. (2021) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsab114 · Cited by 47
Evans, M., Krieger‐Redwood, K., Alam, T. R. G., Smallwood, J., & Jefferies, E. (2020) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2020.04.032 · Cited by 42
Mapping Specific Mental Content during Musical Imagery
Regev, M., Halpern, A. R., Owen, A. M., Patel, A. D., & Zatorre, R. J. (2021) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab036 · Cited by 44
Cortical gradients during naturalistic processing are hierarchical and modality-specific
Samara, A., Eilbott, J. A., Margulies, D. S., Xu, T., & Vanderwal, T. (2023) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120023 · Cited by 45
Self-citationThe default network dominates neural responses to evolving movie stories
Yang, E., Milisav, F., Kopál, J., Holmes, A. J., Mitsis, G. D., Mišić, B., Finn, E. S., & Bzdok, D. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39862-y · Cited by 42
Gao, J., Chen, G., Wu, J., Wang, Y., Hu, Y., Xu, T., Zuo, X., & Yang, Z. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117277 · Cited by 35
Neural Processing of Narratives: From Individual Processing to Viral Propagation
Jääskeläinen, I. P., Klucharev, V. A., Panidi, K., & Шестакова, А. Н. (2020) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2020.00253 · Cited by 44
Baek, E. C., & Parkinson, C. M. (2022) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12710 · Cited by 46
Sharika, K. M., Thaikkandi, S., Nivedita, & Platt, M. L. (2024) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2313801121 · Cited by 33
Integrating media content analysis, reception analysis, and media effects studies
Schmälzle, R., & Huskey, R. (2023) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2023.1155750 · Cited by 39
Gamma‐band neural coupling during conceptual alignment
Chen, D., Zhang, R., Liu, J., Wang, P., Bei, L., Liu, C. J., & Li, X. (2022) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25831 · Cited by 33
Lyons, K., Stevenson, R. A., Owen, A. M., & Stojanoski, B. B. (2020) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102477 · Cited by 31
From story comprehension to the neurobiology of language
Kandylaki, K. D., & Bornkessel‐Schlesewsky, I. (2019) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2019.1584679 · Cited by 30
Seeing Social: A Neural Signature for Conscious Perception of Social Interactions
Varrier, R. S., & Finn, E. S. (2022) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0859-22.2022 · Cited by 24
Narratives: fMRI data for evaluating models of naturalistic language comprehensionPreprint
Nastase, S. A., Liu, Y., Hillman, H., Zadbood, A., Hasenfratz, L., Keshavarzian, N., Chen, J., Honey, C. J., Yeshurun, Y., Regev, M., et al. (2020) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2020.12.23.424091 · Cited by 32
Self-citationNeural synchronization as a function of engagement with the narrative
Ohad, T., & Yeshurun, Y. (2023) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120215 · Cited by 32
Facial and neural mechanisms during interactive disclosure of biographical information
Cañigueral, R., Zhang, X., Noah, J. A., Tachtsidis, I., Hamilton, A. F. D. C., & Joy Hirsch, C. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117572 · Cited by 29
Consensus-building conversation leads to neural alignment
Sievers, B., Welker, C., Hasson, U., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Wheatley, T. (2020) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/562z7 · Cited by 25
Self-citation(2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108695374 · Cited by 30
Audience immersion: validating attentional and physiological measures against self-report
Hammond, H., Armstrong, M., Thomas, G. A., & Gilchrist, I. (2023) · Cognitive Research · doi:10.1186/s41235-023-00475-0 · Cited by 28
Culture in Mind – An Enactivist Account
Hutto, D. D., Gallagher, S., Ilundáin‐Agurruza, J., & Hipólito, I. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108695374.009 · Cited by 29
Wang, R., Yu, R., Yan, T., & Wu, H. (2022) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119596 · Cited by 25
Liu, Z., Lu, K., Hao, N., & Wang, Y. (2023) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0954-23.2023 · Cited by 31
Delta-band audience brain synchrony tracks engagement with live and recorded dance
Rai, L. A., Lee, H., Becke, E., Trenado, C., Abad-Hernando, S., Sperling, M., Vidaurre, D., Wald‐Fuhrmann, M., Richardson, D. C., Ward, J. A., et al. (2025) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2025.112922 · Cited by 24
Personality similarity predicts synchronous neural responses in fMRI and EEG data
Matz, S., Hyon, R., Baek, E. C., Parkinson, C. M., & Cerf, M. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-18237-1 · Cited by 24
Katabi, N., Simon, H., Yakim, S., Ravreby, I., Ohad, T., & Yeshurun, Y. (2023) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0895-22.2022 · Cited by 26
Dieffenbach, M. C., Gillespie, G. S. R., Burns, S. M., McCulloh, I., Ames, D. L., Dagher, M. M., Falk, E. B., & Lieberman, M. D. (2020) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsaa115 · Cited by 29
Osei, P. C., & Bjorklund, D. F. (2024) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-024-09934-6 · Cited by 38
Effects of acute psychosocial stress on interpersonal cooperation and competition in young women
Zhang, R., Zhou, X., Feng, D., Yuan, D., Li, S., Lu, C., & Li, X. (2021) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105738 · Cited by 23
de Bruin, D., van Baar, J. M., Rodríguez, P. L., & FeldmanHall, O. (2023) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq5920 · Cited by 25
Intersubject similarity in neural representations underlies shared episodic memory content
Sheng, J., Wang, S., Zhang, L., Liu, C., Shi, L., Zhou, Y., Hu, H., Chen, C., & Xue, G. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2308951120 · Cited by 22
Soares, A. D., Kim, T., Mugisho, F., Zhu, E., Lin, A., Zheng, C., & Baldassano, C. A. (2024) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2024.09.013 · Cited by 24
Multivariate Identification of Functional Neural Networks Underpinning Humorous Movie Viewing
Lin, F., Lee, H.-J., Kuo, W., & Jääskeläinen, I. P. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.547353 · Cited by 21
Vaccaro, A. G., Scott, B., Gimbel, S. I., & Kaplan, J. (2021) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.665319 · Cited by 23
The Multiple Perspectives Theory of Mental States in Communication
Heller, D., & Brown‐Schmidt, S. (2023) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.13322 · Cited by 26
Teacher-student neural coupling during teaching and learning
Nguyen, M., Chang, A., Micciche, E., Meshulam, M., Nastase, S. A., & Hasson, U. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.05.07.082958 · Cited by 67
Self-citationXie, E., Yin, Q., Li, K., Nastase, S. A., Zhang, R., Wang, N., & Li, X. (2021) · eNeuro · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0245-21.2021 · Cited by 22
Jääskeläinen, I. P., & Kosonogov, V. (2023) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2023.1051934 · Cited by 20
Bonte, M. L., & Brem, S. (2024) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2024.101362 · Cited by 30
Neural signatures of shared subjective affective engagement and disengagement during movie viewing
Nanni‐Zepeda, M., Degutis, J. M., Wu, C. M., Rothlein, D., Fan, Y., Grimm, S., Walter, M., Esterman, M. S., & Zuberer, A. (2024) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.26622 · Cited by 22
Ramot, M., Walsh, C., Reimann, G. E., & Martin, A. D. (2020) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-020-0771-1 · Cited by 20
From Oral Theory to Neuroscience: a Dialogue on Communication
Giordano, M. (2022) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110751987-011 · Cited by 19
Wu, W., Morales, M., Patel, T., Pickering, M. J., & Hoffman, P. (2022) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2022.08.002 · Cited by 22
Lyu, Y., Su, Z., Neumann, D. M., Meidenbauer, K. L., & Leong, Y. C. (2024) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1252-23.2024 · Cited by 21
Gendron, M., Mesquita, B., & Barrett, L. F. (2020) · Culture, Mind, and Brain · doi:10.1017/9781108695374.010 · Cited by 20
Biasing the neurocognitive processing of videos with the presence of a real cultural other
Zhou, S., Xu, X., He, X., Zhou, F., Zhai, Y., Chen, J., Long, Y., Zheng, L., & Lu, C. (2022) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac122 · Cited by 18
Fractal-Based Analysis of fMRI BOLD Signal During Naturalistic Viewing Conditions
Campbell, O., Vanderwal, T., & Weber, A. M. (2022) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.809943 · Cited by 20
Self-citationNeural activity during story listening is synchronized across individuals despite acoustic masking
Irsik, V. C., Johnsrude, I., & Herrmann, B. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01842 · Cited by 14
Jiang, K.-Y., Zhao, G., Feng, Q., Guan, S., Im, H., Zhang, B., Wang, P.-C., Jia, X., Zhu, H., Zhu, Y., et al. (2024) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.26808 · Cited by 17
Common functional localizers to enhance NHP & cross-species neuroscience imaging research
Russ, B. E., Petkov, C. I., Kwok, S. C., Zhu, Q., Belin, P., Vanduffel, W., & Hamed, S. B. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118203 · Cited by 16
Kim, H. J., Lux, B. K., Lee, E., Finn, E. S., & Woo, C. (2024) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2401959121 · Cited by 15
Hilger, K., & Markett, S. A. (2021) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00198 · Cited by 14
A developmental framework of interpersonal neural synchrony
Hoehl, S., Bánki, A., Brzozowska, A., Carollo, A., Kostorz, K., Nguyen, T., Pletti, C., Reisner, S., Schäfer, V. T., Schaetz, C., et al. (2025) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2025.101234 · Cited by 15
The anatomy of friendship: neuroanatomic homophily of the social brain among classroom friends
D’Onofrio, P., Norman, L. J., Sudre, G. P., White, T. J. H., & Shaw, P. (2021) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab398 · Cited by 15
Zhu, T., Zhang, X., Jin, L., Wang, L., & Wang, Y. (2025) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121042 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Nguyen, M., Vanderwal, T., & Hasson, U.
- Affiliations
- Princeton University (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nguyen, Mai
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 184
- Pages
- 161-170
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6287615
- OpenAlex
- W2889716325
- Semantic Scholar
- 470e9838223eaa20ad81a15076b686e8e1749275
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 39 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 12
- FWCI
- 37.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (5DP1HD091948-02, 1RO1MH112566-01)
- The Allison Family Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- narrative interpretation, default mode network, frontoparietal network, modality invariance, abstract animation, individual differences
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Photic Stimulation, Comprehension, Pattern Recognition, Physiological, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
