Cited by 23Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesMind wandering and attentionPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

Modulation of the brain's core-self network by self-appraisal processes

Open access
Delahoy, Rebekah, Davey, Christopher G., Jamieson, Alec J., Finlayson-Short, Laura, Savage, Hannah S., Steward, Trevor, Harrison, Ben J.·2022·NeuroImage

Abstract

The 'core' regions of the default mode network (DMN) - the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), and inferior parietal lobules (IPL) - show consistent engagement across mental states that involve self-oriented processing. Precisely how these regions interact in support of such processes remains an important unanswered question. In the current functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we examined dynamic interactions of the 'core-self' DMN regions during two forms of self-referential cognition: direct self-appraisal (thinking about oneself) and reflected self-appraisal (thinking about oneself from a third-person perspective). One-hundred and eleven participants completed our dual self-appraisal task during fMRI, and general linear models were used to characterize common and distinct neural responses to these conditions. Informed by these results, we then applied dynamic causal modelling to examine causal interactions among the 'core-self' regions, and how they were specifically modulated under the influence of direct and reflected self-appraisal. As a primary observation, this network modelling revealed a distinct inhibitory influence of the left IPL on the PCC during reflected compared to direct self-appraisal, which was accompanied by evidence of greater activation in both regions during the reflected self-appraisal condition. We suggest that the greater engagement of posterior DMN regions during reflected self-appraisal is a function of the higher-order processing needed for this form of self-appraisal, with the left IPL supporting abstract self-related processes including episodic memory retrieval and shifts of perspective. Overall, we show that core DMN regions interact in functionally unique ways in support of self-referential processes, even when these processes are inter-related. Further characterization of DMN functional interactions across self-related mental states is likely to inform a deeper understanding of how this brain network orchestrates the self.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.118980

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The mPFC is more specifically engaged by demands for cognitive elaboration, evaluation, and emotion reappraisal.

    “In contrast, the mPFC is more specifically engaged by demands for cognitive elaboration, evaluation, and emotion reappraisal, 39”

    From 20 years of the default mode network: A review and synthesis. (2023) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) links the MPFC to cognitive elaboration, and the Discussion (page unavailable) describes information relayed to it for inferential and evaluative processing. The paper examines self-appraisal, however, and does not support the additional claim about emotion reappraisal. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Delahoy, R., Davey, C. G., Jamieson, A. J., Finlayson-Short, L., Savage, H. S., Steward, T., & Harrison, B. J.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Harrison, Ben J.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
251
Pages
118980
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4210867118
Cited by
22
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3
FWCI
2.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1161897, 1061757, 1124472)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
default mode network, self-assessment, self-referential processing, posterior cingulate cortex, inferior parietal lobule, medial prefrontal cortex, dynamic causal modeling, functional interactions, perspective taking, episodic memory retrieval
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Nerve Net, Diagnostic Self Evaluation, Memory, Episodic

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.

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