CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 266Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentAction Observation and SynchronizationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

Open access
Jenkins, Adrianna C., Macrae, C. Neil, Mitchell, Jason P.·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0708785105PMC PMC2393803
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

One useful strategy for inferring others' mental states (i.e., mentalizing) may be to use one's own thoughts, feelings, and desires as a proxy for those of other people. Such self-referential accounts of social cognition are supported by recent neuroimaging observations that a single brain region, ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vMPFC), is engaged both by tasks that require introspections about self and by tasks that require inferences about the minds of others perceived to be similar to self. To test whether people automatically refer to their own mental states when considering those of a similar other, we examined repetition-related suppression of vMPFC response during self-reflections that followed either an initial reflection about self or a judgment of another person. Consistent with the hypothesis that perceivers spontaneously engage in self-referential processing when mentalizing about particular individuals, vMPFC response was suppressed when self-reflections followed either an initial reflection about self or a judgment of a similar, but not a dissimilar, other. These results suggest that thinking about the mind of another person may rely importantly on reference to one's own mental characteristics.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Using fMRI repetition suppression, the authors found that ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vMPFC) activity during self-reflection was suppressed after either a prior self-reflection or a judgment about a similar other, but not after a judgment about a dissimilar other. This suggests that mentalizing about similar others may spontaneously recruit self-referential processing.

Key findings

  • In 13 participants, vMPFC response to self-reflections was significantly suppressed when self-reflection followed an initial self-reflection (self-after-self) and when it followed a judgment of a similar other (self-after-similar), but not when it followed a judgment of a dissimilar other (self-after-dissimilar).
  • Self-after-dissimilar judgments showed a significant increase in vMPFC response over baseline [t(12) = 4.75, P < 0.0005] and were significantly greater than self-after-self and self-after-similar trials (all P values < 0.008).
  • Self-after-similar trials showed nearly indistinguishable repetition suppression from self-after-self trials for identical judgments [t(12) = 0.06, P > 0.95; different judgments, P > 0.11].
  • A separate behavioral study (n = 14) found participants were faster to self-reflect after judging a similar other (M = 1,990 ms) than a dissimilar other (M = 2,079 ms) [t(13) = 2.84, P < 0.02].

Methods

  • fMRI study: 13 right-handed native English speakers (8 male; mean age 20.7 years, range 19–23) completed an opinion-judging task with 240 paired prime-self trials and 90 singleton trials, followed by an explicit self-reference task (100 trials, self vs. Bush).
  • Primes were self, a liberal target manipulated as similar, or a conservative target manipulated as dissimilar; half the paired trials used the identical opinion question across phases and half used a different question.
  • fMRI data were collected on a 3 Tesla Siemens Trio scanner and analyzed in SPM99 using random-effects analyses; vMPFC ROIs were defined from self > other contrasts, and repetition suppression was indexed by subtracting singleton-trial responses from corresponding paired prime-self trials.

Limitations

  • The paper states that exactly how perceivers determine whether someone is sufficiently similar to justify self-referential mentalizing remains an open question, as does characterization of the cognitive processes supporting mentalizing about dissimilar others.
  • The paper states that secondary analyses subconditionalizing by same vs. different behavioral response were based on a small subset of data with reduced power, and that it remains unclear whether less repetition suppression occurs when a different question is asked about self and a similar other.
  • Evident from the text: the fMRI sample was small (n = 13) and the supporting behavioral sample was also small (n = 14), limiting power and generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0708785105

Cites

101 of 101 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 42 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Self-after-dissimilar judgments were associated with a significant increase in vMPFC response over baseline (t(12)=4.75, P<0.0005).

    “Indeed, self-after-dissimilar judgments were associated with a significant increase in vMPFC response over baseline [ t (12) = 4.75, P < 0.0005].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    A vMPFC region was obtained from the random effects contrast of self > other trials in the explicit self-reference task.

    “Consistent with earlier studies (15-18), a single region was obtained from the random effects contrast of self > other trials located in vMPFC (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [15] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [16] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [17] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [18] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingown data
    § Results

    vMPFC response to self-reflections was substantially suppressed when participants reported their opinion immediately after judging a similar other.

    “Consistent with this prediction, just as for self-after-self judgments, vMPFC response to selfreflections was substantially suppressed when participants reported their opinion immediately after judging a similar other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants perceived themselves to be more similar to the liberal target than to the conservative target.

    “Likewise, participants rated the liberal target to be more similar to self ( M = 4.80 on a 7-point scale) than the conservative target ( M = 3.00; P < 0.02).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    No difference was observed in the level of repetition suppression during self-after-self trials as a function of whether participants responded to the identical or a different opinion question on the second phase (t(12)=0.50, P>0.62).

    “Importantly, no difference was observed in the level of repetition suppression during self-after-self trials as a function of whether participants responded to the identical or a different opinion question on the second phase of the trial [ t (12) = 0.50, P > 0.62].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 15
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 19

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    For identical judgments, self-after-similar trials were associated with nearly indistinguishable levels of repetition suppression as for self-after-self judgments (t(12)=0.06, P>0.95; for different judgments, P>0.11).

    “For identical judgments, self-after-similar trials were associated with nearly indistinguishable levels of repetition suppression as for self-after-self judgments [ t (12) = 0.06, P &gt; 0.95; for different judgments, P &gt; 0.11].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    The pattern of repetition suppression within the alternative vMPFC ROI was indistinguishable from that in the region defined by the explicit self-reference task, with the exception of self-after-similar-different trials.

    “Importantly, the pattern of repetition suppression within this alternative vMPFC ROI was indistinguishable from that in the region defined by the explicit self-reference task (with the exception of self-after-similardifferent trials, as detailed below).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    No simple effect was observed between same versus different responses for either self-after-similar or self-after-dissimilar trials (both Ps > 0.26).

    “Second, no simple effect was observed between same versus different responses for either self-after-similar or self-after-dissimilar trials (both P s &gt; 0.26)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Identical and different judgment pairs both differed significantly from self-singletons (both Ps < 0.05).

    “Likewise, identical and different judgment pairs both differed significantly from self-singletons (both P s < 0.05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Although vMPFC response to self-reflections was typically greater than baseline when participants self-reflected in isolation (self-singleton trials), activity in this region was significantly reduced during self-reflections that followed an initial self report.

    “Indeed, as displayed in Fig. 1, although vMPFC response to self-reflections was typically greater than baseline when participants self-reflected in isolation (i.e., for selfsingleton trials), activity in this region was significantly reduced during self-reflections that followed an initial self report.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Discussion

    Whereas self-reflections were associated with a significant activation of vMPFC after judgments of a dissimilar other, the response of this region was equivalently suppressed during self-reflections that followed judgments of a similar other as during those that followed initial self-reflections.

    “That is, whereas self-reflections were associated with a significant activation of vMPFC after judgments of a dissimilar other, the response of this region was equivalently suppressed during self-reflections that followed judgments of a similar other as during those that followed initial self-reflections”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    The response to self-after-similar judgments was negative-going and did not differ significantly from baseline activity (repeated, P>0.19; novel, P>0.93).

    “As for self-after-self trials, the response to self-after-similar judgments was negative-going and did not differ significantly from baseline activity (repeated, P &gt; 0.19; novel, P &gt; 0.93).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Methods

    A region of vMPFC was identified from the comparison of self > other (self trials vs. Bush trials), and a second vMPFC ROI was defined from within the opinion-judging task from the comparison of self > other using singleton trials only (self-singletons > similar singletons plus dissimilar singletons).

    “First, a region of vMPFC was identified from the comparison of self &gt; other (i.e., self trials vs. Bush trials). In addition, a second vMPFC ROI was defined from within the opinion-judging task from the comparison of self &gt; other by using singleton trials only (i.e., self-singletons &gt; similar singletons plus dissimilar singletons).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    Repetition suppression is the observation that neural activity in stimulus-sensitive brain regions is typically reduced when a stimulus is repeated.

    “These techniques rely on an effect known as ''repetition suppression,'' the observation that neural activity in stimulus-sensitive brain regions is typically reduced when a stimulus is repeated (19).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [19] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    One possible solution to the problem of mentalizing is to use one's own thoughts and feelings as a basis for understanding those of others.

    “One possible solution to the problem of mentalizing may be found in the use of one's own thoughts and feelings as a basis for understanding those of others (6-9).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [6]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [7]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [8]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [9]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    Researchers generally agree that the suppressed fMRI BOLD response to repeated stimuli must reflect changes in firing properties of neurons that subserve processing of a stimulus, and that suppression across two stimuli indicates that the same or largely overlapping population of neurons is engaged by both stimuli.

    “Although the precise physiological basis of repetition suppression has yet to be fully elucidated, researchers generally agree that the suppressed fMRI BOLD response to repeated stimuli must reflect changes in the firing properties of neurons that subserve the processing of a stimulus, and that suppression across two stimuli indicates that the same (or at least a largely overlapping) population of”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [19] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [30] Grafton ST, Hamilton AFdC (2007) Hum Mov Sci 26:590-616.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [31] Grill-Spector K, Malach R (2001) Acta Psychol ( Amst ) 107:293-321.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [32] Sawamura H, Orban GA, Vogels R (2006) Neuron 49:307-318.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [33] Wiggs CL, Martin A (1998) Curr Opin Neurobiol 8:227-233.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    Humans consistently explain the behavior of those around them by appealing to others' mental states, such as thoughts, feelings, likes and dislikes, goals, intentions, dispositions, and personality traits.

    “H umans consistently explain the behavior of those around them by appealing to others' mental states; that is, their thoughts and feelings, likes and dislikes, current goals and intentions, and enduring dispositions and personality traits (1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    Activation of the same brain voxel by different tasks might occur because each activates distinct, but neighboring or interdigitated, neuronal populations.

    “Because such techniques integrate neural activity across hundreds of thousands of neurons, activation of the same brain voxel by different tasks might occur because each activates distinct, but neighboring or interdigitated, neuronal populations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    The same brain region (vMPFC) appears to subserve introspection about oneself and mental state inferences about similar others, suggesting an overlapping set of cognitive processes carries out these two tasks.

    “That the same brain region appears to subserve introspection about oneself and mental state inferences about similar others suggests that an overlapping set of cognitive processes carries out these two otherwise disparate tasks”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    The strategy of using one's own mental states to understand others should be limited to situations in which one can assume another person generally thinks and feels similarly to oneself.

    “Thus, the strategy of using one's own mental states as a basis for understanding those of others should be limited to situations in which one can assume that another person generally thinks and feels similarly to oneself.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premiseown data
    § Discussion

    Social cognition, rather than being composed of a single, all-purpose module for mentalizing (35), relies on a number of different strategies for mentalizing that vary with the particulars of the social environment (36-39).

    “Such findings reinforce the emerging view that social cognition, rather than being composed of a single, all-purpose module for mentalizing (35), relies on a number of different strategies for mentalizing that vary with the particulars of the social environment (36-39).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [35] Leslie AM, Friedman O, German TP (2004) Trends Cogn Sci 8:528-533. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [36] Ames DR (2004) J Pers Soc Psychol 87:340-353.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [37] Ames DR (2004) J Pers Soc Psychol 87:573-585.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [38] Macrae CN, Bodenhausen GV, Milne AB (1994) J Pers Soc Psychol 66:37-47.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [39]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    These results underscore the tight link between thinking about oneself and thinking about other people, suggesting that self-referential processing may be triggered spontaneously when considering the mental states of others.

    “These results underscore the tight link between thinking about oneself and thinking about other people, suggesting that selfreferential processing may be triggered spontaneously when considering the mental states of others.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning
    § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others

    Repetition suppression is well suited for examining the hypothesis that mentalizing about like-minded individuals draws on the same cognitive processes as introspecting about one's own mental characteristics.

    “These characteristics of repetition suppression render it well suited for examining the hypothesis that mentalizing about like-minded individuals draws on the same cognitive processes as introspecting about one's own mental characteristics.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    The population of vMPFC neurons subserving introspections about self serve double-duty by also participating in representing the minds of similar others.

    “This interpretation of repetition suppression suggests the intriguing possibility that the population of vMPFC neurons subserving introspections about self serve double-duty by also participating in representing the minds of similar others.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Results

    Activity in vMPFC can be suppressed either by repeatedly introspecting about the self or by introspecting about self immediately after judging a similar, but not a dissimilar, other.

    “Together these results suggest that activity in vMPFC, a brain region widely acknowledged to subserve selfreferential thought, can be suppressed either by repeatedly introspecting about the self or by introspecting about self immediately after judging a similar, but not a dissimilar, other.”
    • Also stated in: § Repetition suppression of ventromedial prefrontal activity during judgments of self and others · plain
      “Consistent with the hypothesis that perceivers spontaneously engage in self-referential processing when mentalizing about particular individuals, vMPFC response was suppressed when selfreflections followed either an initial reflection about self or a judgment of a similar, but not a dissimilar, other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    Most proposals regarding the physiological basis of repetition suppression conclude that the likely basis of the effect is that the same, or largely overlapping, population of neurons subserves the processing of two distinct stimuli.

    “Most proposals regarding the physiological basis of repetition suppression conclude that the likely basis of the effect is that the same, or largely overlapping, population of neurons subserves the processing of two distinct stimuli.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [19] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [33] Wiggs CL, Martin A (1998) Curr Opin Neurobiol 8:227-233.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [34] Henson RN, Goshen-Gottstein Y, Ganel T, Otten LJ, Quayle A, Rugg MD (2003) Cereb Cortex 13:793-805.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    When another person is assumed to be sufficiently similar to self, perceivers appear to make use of the same processes deployed for introspecting about their own mental characteristics, but decline to do so for others assumed to be dissimilar from self.

    “When another person is assumed to be sufficiently similar to self, perceivers appear to make use of the same processes deployed for introspecting about their own mental characteristics, but decline to do so for others assumed to be dissimilar from self.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Results

    A second vMPFC ROI was defined from trials within the opinion-judging task by contrasting self-singleton trials to both similar- and dissimilar-singleton trials (self > other).

    “In addition, a second vMPFC ROI was defined from trials within the opinion-judging task by contrasting self-singleton trials to both similar- and dissimilar-singleton trials (i.e., self &gt; other).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Methods

    Targets were always the same sex as the participant, and both the pairing of particular faces to descriptions and the order of presentation (liberal target first, conservative target first) were randomized across participants.

    “Targets were always the same sex as the participant, and both the pairing of particular faces to descriptions and the order of presentation (liberal target first, conservative target first) were randomized across participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    That our minds naturally segregate dissimilar from similar others and then mentalize in a distinct way about those perceived to be different from self may be one of the factors that gives rise to aspects of outgroup prejudice, such as stereotypes about members of various racial, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds.

    “Indeed, that our minds naturally segregate dissimilar from similar others and then mentalize in a distinct way about those perceived to be different from self may be one of the factors that gives rise to aspects of outgroup prejudice, such as stereotypes about members of various racial, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data
    § Methods

    The opinion questions were pretested to be unrelated to political orientation.

    “Opinion questions referred to a range of personal issues that were pretested to be unrelated to political orientation (e.g., ''dislike mushrooms on pizza?''; ''enjoy crossword puzzles?''; ''like to be the center of attention?''; ''generally see things from many perspectives?''; ''enjoy helping friends with problems?''; and ''like impressionist artwork?'').”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Results

    The parallel analysis of response time in the fMRI experiment was precluded by the abbreviated length of trials necessitated by rapid event-related scanning, such that participants were typically near the ceiling allowed by the response window.

    “(The parallel analysis of response time in the fMRI experiment was precluded by the abbreviated length of trials necessitated by rapid event-related scanning, such that participants were typically near the ceiling allowed by the response window.)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Methods

    One additional participant, who was being treated for depression at the time of the study, was excluded from analysis.

    “One additional participant, who was being treated for depression at the time of the study, was excluded from analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Results

    The behavioral study used a behavioral analogue of repetition suppression, wherein repeated processing results in speeded performance on subsequent trials of the same kind (i.e., repetition priming) (33).

    “In this data collection, we made use of a behavioral analogue of repetition suppression, wherein repeated processing results in speeded performance on subsequent trials of the same kind (i.e., repetition priming) (33).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Wiggs CL, Martin A (1998) Curr Opin Neurobiol 8:227-233.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Discussion

    Human social cognition may possess an intrinsic bias to discriminate between those perceived to be similar, like-minded members of one's ingroup and those perceived to be dissimilar, exotic others.

    “Somewhat ironically, however, because one's own mental states may serve as an appropriate proxy only for those whom we assume think and feel like we do, human social cognition may possess an intrinsic bias to discriminate between those perceived to be similar, like-minded members of one's ingroup and those perceived to be dissimilar, exotic others.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Methods

    This choice of other (Bush) was guided by earlier studies of self-referential processing, which have typically used the current head of state (a familiar, but not personally known, other) as a comparison to self-judgments (15, 16, 41).

    “This choice of other was guided by earlier studies of self-referential processing, which have typically used the current head of state (a familiar, but not personally known, other) as a comparison to self-judgments (15, 16, 41).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [15] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [16]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [41] Rogers TB, Kuiper NA, Kirker WS (1977) J Pers Soc Psychol 35:677-688.

      Not checked in the free run.

31 of 31

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little is known about how exactly one successfully gains insight into the inner workings of another's mind.

    “little is known about how exactly one successfully gains insight into the inner workings of another's mind.”
1 of 1

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?

  • Decreased signal with repeated stimulus presentation has been used as a tool for structure-function brain mapping, as it is thought that signal decreases reflect neuronal populations that represent and detect change in stimulus features.

    “Decreased signal with repeated stimulus presentation has been used as a tool for structure-function brain mapping, as it is thought that signal decreases reflect neuronal populations that represent and detect change in stimulus features”

    From Feeling left out or just surprised? Neural correlates of social exclusion and overinclusion in adolescence (2020) · cites this paper as Jenkins, Macrae, & Mitchell, 2008

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.

  • Consistentt(12) = 3.25reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .007

    “t (12) = 3.25, p < .01”

  • Consistentt(12) = 0.5reported p > .62 · recomputed p = .626

    “t (12) = 0.50, p > .62”

  • Consistentt(12) = 4.75reported p < .0005 · recomputed p < .001

    “t (12) = 4.75, p < .0005”

3 of 3

Self-check

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

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. DL Ames, AC Jenkins, MR Banaji, JP Mitchell Psychol Sci, in press. (2008).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jenkins, A. C., Macrae, C. N., & Mitchell, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-03-18
Volume
105
Issue
11
Pages
4507-4512
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.0708785105
PMC
PMC2393803
OpenAlex
W2019725315
Semantic Scholar
5ea2bc62c96153fceba947fb5fb56ed8abd264b4
Cited by
266
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 25
FWCI
40.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0642448)
  • Centre d'Imagerie BioMédicale
  • Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41-RR-14075, P41RR014075)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
ventromedial prefrontal cortex, repetition suppression, mentalization, self-referential processing, social cognition, self-reflection, self-other similarity, theory of mind
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior, Ego, Female, Humans, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Prefrontal Cortex

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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