CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 830Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAction Observation and SynchronizationFace Recognition and Perception

A Meta-analysis of Functional Neuroimaging Studies of Self- and Other Judgments Reveals a Spatial Gradient for Mentalizing in Medial Prefrontal Cortex

Open access
Denny, Bryan T., Kober, Hedy, Wager, Tor D., Ochsner, Kevin N.·2012·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
DOI 10.1162/jocn_a_00233PMC PMC3806720
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The distinction between processes used to perceive and understand the self and others has received considerable attention in psychology and neuroscience. Brain findings highlight a role for various regions, in particular the medial PFC (mPFC), in supporting judgments about both the self and others. We performed a meta-analysis of 107 neuroimaging studies of self- and other-related judgments using multilevel kernel density analysis [Kober, H., & Wager, T. D. Meta-analyses of neuroimaging data. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, 1, 293–300, 2010]. We sought to determine what brain regions are reliably involved in each judgment type and, in particular, what the spatial and functional organization of mPFC is with respect to them. Relative to nonmentalizing judgments, both self- and other judgments were associated with activity in mPFC, ranging from ventral to dorsal extents, as well as common activation of the left TPJ and posterior cingulate. A direct comparison between self- and other judgments revealed that ventral mPFC as well as left ventrolateral PFC and left insula were more frequently activated by self-related judgments, whereas dorsal mPFC, in addition to bilateral TPJ and cuneus, was more frequently activated by other-related judgments. Logistic regression analyses revealed that ventral and dorsal mPFC lay at opposite ends of a functional gradient: The z coordinates reported in individual studies predicted whether the study involved self- or other-related judgments, which were associated with increasingly ventral or dorsal portions of mPFC, respectively. These results argue for a distributed rather than localizationist account of mPFC organization and support an emerging view on the functional heterogeneity of mPFC.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This meta-analysis of 107 functional neuroimaging studies found that self- and other-related judgments share medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), left temporoparietal junction, and posterior cingulate activity, but differ in mPFC subregions. A logistic regression showed a dorsal–ventral spatial gradient in mPFC, with increasingly ventral activation associated with self judgments and increasingly dorsal activation associated with other judgments.

Key findings

  • Across 107 published reports and 307 contrasts, both Self>Baseline and Other>Baseline involved broad mPFC activation from ventral to dorsal extents, plus common activation in left temporoparietal junction, posterior cingulate, and left middle temporal gyrus/superior temporal sulcus.
  • Direct Self>Other comparisons activated vmPFC, including left rostral BA 10, anterior paracingulate cortex (BA 32), left ventrolateral PFC, left anterior and mid-insula, left dorsal caudate, thalamus, and left temporal pole; Other>Self activated bilateral dmPFC, bilateral TPJ, and cuneus.
  • Logistic regression within mPFC used 47 Self contrasts and 43 Other contrasts from 33 and 34 studies, respectively; z coordinate significantly predicted Self vs. Other contrast status, while x and y coordinates did not. The scatterplot relating estimated self proportions to z coordinate showed r = −0.71, p < 0.01.
  • The authors interpret the results as supporting a distributed gradient rather than discrete, localizationist modules for self- and other-related processing in mPFC.

Methods

  • Literature search covered January 1995–February 2008 and included healthy, unmedicated adults, PET or fMRI, image subtraction, and Talairach/MNI coordinates; this yielded 107 reports and 307 contrasts, with 74 Self, 76 Other, and 24 Baseline contrasts drawn from 48, 48, and 19 studies, respectively.
  • Multilevel Kernel Density Analysis (MKDA) registered peaks to MNI space, convolved them with a 10-mm spherical kernel, created Comparison Indicator Maps, weighted by square root of sample size, and thresholded with 5,000 Monte Carlo iterations at p < .05 FWE-corrected.
  • A binary logistic regression predicted self vs. other activation status from MNI x, y, and z coordinates within an independently defined mPFC boundary (|x| < 25, y > 15, z > −5).

Limitations

  • Stated: the relatively small number of studies within each Self/Other × judgment-type condition meant that differences between types of mental state judgments were not the focus; future work may test whether the gradient is specific to certain judgment types.
  • Stated: 29 studies were coded but did not contribute contrasts because of the conservative coding algorithm, and contrasts reflecting both Self and Other judgments were excluded.
  • Evident: as a coordinate-based meta-analysis, it relies on reported significant activation foci and cannot directly assess individual-study effect sizes, within-study variability, or the full range of mentalizing task designs.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn_a_00233

Cites

99 of 99 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 16 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Estimated self proportions correlated negatively with z coordinate within the mPFC boundary (r = −0.71, p < 0.01).

    “Further, to illustrate the logistic regression result for the z coordinates in particular, a scatterplot showing estimated self proportions as a function of z coordinate within the mPFC boundary is shown in Figure 5 (r=−0.71, p<0.01).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Self-related judgments were associated with relatively ventral mPFC (BA 10) and anterior paracingulate cortex (BA 32).

    “Consistent with prior work (Gilbert et al., 2006; Mitchell, Banaji, & Macrae, 2005; Mitchell et al., 2006; Northoff et al., 2006; Qin & Northoff, 2011; van der Meer et al., 2010), we found that self-related judgments were associated with relatively ventral mPFC (BA 10) and anterior paracingulate cortex (BA 32) whereas other-related judgments were associated with relatively dorsal mPFC (BA 8 & 9).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was substantial functional overlap in left temporoparietal junction, posterior cingulate, and left middle temporal gyrus and superior temporal sulcus for self- and other-related judgments.

    “While the overlap in mPFC was the most striking and extensive, there was substantial functional overlap in other areas of the brain as well, including left temporoparietal junction (TPJ), posterior cingulate, and left middle temporal gyrus and superior temporal sulcus, all of which have been previously associated with mentalizing about the beliefs, desires, perceptions, or emotions of oneself and”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In direct comparison, other-related judgments more frequently activated dorsal mPFC, bilateral TPJ, and cuneus than self-related judgments.

    “whereas dorsal mPFC (dmPFC), in addition to bilateral TPJ and cuneus, were more frequently activated by other-related judgments.”
    • Also stated in: § MKDA Analyses: Regions involved in Processing Self, Other, or Both · boosted
      “For the Other condition relative to the Self condition, robust bilateral dmPFC activity was observed, in addition to bilateral TPJ and cuneus activity (Supplementary Figure 2 and Supplementary Table 4).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The null hypothesis for the Monte Carlo simulation was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.
  • Findingown data

    Within medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), the z coordinate significantly predicted Self vs. Other contrast status.

    “Within mPFC, logistic regression analyses showed a significant effect of z coordinate predicting Self vs. Other contrast status, while x and y coordinates were not significantly predictive (Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 20
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 14
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Self-related judgments were associated with almost entirely left-lateralized activity, including left ventrolateral PFC, left anterior and mid-insula, and dorsal caudate.

    “In addition, self-related judgments were associated with almost entirely left-lateralized activity, including left ventrolateral PFC (vlPFC), left anterior and mid-insula, and dorsal caudate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Findingown data

    The logistic regression analysis was performed on 47 Self contrasts and 43 Other contrasts within the mPFC region, drawn from 33 and 34 studies respectively.

    “The resulting analysis was performed on 47 Self contrasts and 43 Other contrasts that reported activation points within this mPFC region. These contrasts were drawn from 33 studies for Self and 34 studies for Other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Self- and other-related judgments are supported by both common and distinct groups of brain regions that include many regions implicated in mentalizing in prior work.

    “Using a database of 107 published neuroimaging studies we reported evidence for self- and other-related judgments being (1) supported by both common and distinct groups of regions that include many implicated in mentalizing in prior work, and (2) associated with a spatial mentalizing gradient within mPFC, with increasingly ventral activation being increasingly associated with self-related judgment”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Findingown data

    29 studies were coded but did not contribute contrasts to the meta-analysis due to the conservative coding algorithm.

    “As detailed in Supplementary Table 1, 29 studies were coded but did not contribute contrasts to the meta-analysis due to our conservative coding algorithm, described below.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Relative to non-mentalizing baseline, both self and other judgments were associated with activity in mPFC ranging from ventral to dorsal extents, as well as common activation of left temporoparietal junction, posterior cingulate, and left middle temporal gyrus/superior temporal sulcus.

    “Relative to non-mentalizing judgments, both self and other judgments were associated with activity in mPFC, ranging from ventral to dorsal extents, as well as common activation of the left temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and posterior cingulate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The null hypothesis for the Monte Carlo simulation was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.

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

    Findingown data

    Across Self and Other conditions, the mental state judgment types varied: affectively-relevant (17 Self, 19 Other), trait (11 Self, 14 Other), intentions (9 Self, 20 Other); cognitive/ToM contrasts were more often Other (22) than Self (2).

    “Across Self and Other judgment conditions the nature of the mental state judgment varied, although for each judgment a comparable number of contrasts were coded as being affectively-relevant (17 for Self, 19 for Other), relating to trait judgments (11 for Self, 14 for Other), and relating to a target’s intentions (9 for Self, 20 for Other). Contrasts coded as cognitive, such as theory-of-mind judg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Findingown data

    The total number of contrasts per condition were 74 for Self, 76 for Other, and 24 for Baseline, drawn from 48, 48, and 19 studies respectively.

    “The total number of contrasts that pertained to each condition were as follows: 74 for Self, 76 for Other, and 24 for Baseline. These contrasts were drawn from 48 studies for Self, 48 studies for Other, and 19 studies for Baseline (Supplementary Tables 1 & 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In direct comparison, self-related judgments more frequently activated ventral mPFC (including left rostral BA 10 and anterior paracingulate cortex BA 32), left ventrolateral PFC, left anterior and mid-insula, left dorsal caudate, thalamus, and left temporal pole than other-related judgments.

    “A direct comparison between self and other judgments revealed that ventral mPFC (vmPFC), as well as left ventrolateral PFC and left insula, were more frequently activated by self-related judgments”
    • Also stated in: § MKDA Analyses: Regions involved in Processing Self, Other, or Both · plain
      “Figure 3 shows that the Self condition, relative to the Other condition, significantly activated vmPFC, including left rostral BA 10, anterior paracingulate cortex (BA 32), left ventrolateral PFC (vlPFC), left anterior and mid-insula, left dorsal caudate, thalamus, and left temporal pole.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The null hypothesis for the Monte Carlo simulation was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Self-related judgments were reliably associated with activation along the cortical midline, including mPFC, anterior cingulate, and posterior cingulate, particularly for the self vs. baseline comparison, though activation was not exclusive to the midline.

    “Specifically, like Northoff and colleagues, we found evidence for self-related judgments being reliably associated with activation along the cortical midline, including mPFC, anterior cingulate, and posterior cingulate, particularly for the self vs. baseline comparison, though activation was not exclusive to the midline.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Direct comparisons between self and other judgments yielded a distributed set of regions more active for self judgments (vmPFC, left vlPFC, left caudate) and another set more active for other judgments (dmPFC, bilateral TPJ, cuneus).

    “Direct comparisons between judgments of self and others yielded a distributed set of regions that are relatively more active for self judgments, including vmPFC, left vlPFC, and left caudate, and another set of regions that are more active for other judgments, including dmPFC, bilateral TPJ and cuneus.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both ventral and dorsal mPFC were active for both self and other judgments, and self judgments were more strongly associated with ventral relative to dorsal mPFC activity across all studies.

    “While this particular discrepant result could stem from multiple causes, we included the results from this study in the present meta-analysis and found that while both ventral and dorsal mPFC were active for both self and other judgments, self judgments were more strongly associated with ventral relative to dorsal mPFC activity across all studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The results support a distributed rather than localizationist account of mPFC organization and an emerging view of mPFC functional heterogeneity.

    “These results argue for a distributed rather than localizationist account of mPFC organization and support an emerging view on the functional heterogeneity of mPFC.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The null hypothesis for the Monte Carlo simulation was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.

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

    Premisecitation

    Prior work has associated self-related judgments with right-lateralized activity.

    “This stands in contrast to prior work that has associated self-related judgments with right-lateralized activity (Keenan, Ganis, Freund, & Pascual-Leone, 2000; Keenan, Wheeler, Gallup, & Pascual-Leone, 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Keenan, Ganis, Freund, & Pascual-Leone, 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Keenan, Wheeler, Gallup, & Pascual-Leone, 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Study design and conductnone given

    Contrasts were excluded if they involved patients with major psychiatric disease, participants on a therapeutic regimen, children under 18, or non-contrast analyses.

    “Contrasts were excluded if they met any of the following criteria: (1) They involved patients with major psychiatric disease; (2) They involved participants on a therapeutic regimen; (3) They involved children under 18 years of age; (4) They were non-contrast analyses (e.g. parametric analyses).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    As of the time of the study, there was no clear model of the functional organization of mPFC with respect to processes supporting self and other judgments.

    “Our ability to draw inferences about the meaning of these data is limited, however, by the fact that there is as of yet no clear model of the functional organization of mPFC with respect to processes that support judgments of self and others.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Study design and conductnone given

    Coordinates were verified by at least 2 independent investigators.

    “Coordinates were verified by at least 2 independent investigators.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Self- and other-related processing in mPFC is organized as a spatial gradient, with increasingly ventral activation associated with self-related judgments and increasingly dorsal activation associated with other-related judgments.

    “These results reflect a spatial processing gradient, such that increasingly ventral or dorsal mPFC activation were increasingly associated with either self- or other-related judgments, respectively.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “Using a database of 107 published neuroimaging studies we reported evidence for self- and other-related judgments being (1) supported by both common and distinct groups of regions that include many implicated in mentalizing in prior work, and (2) associated with a spatial mentalizing gradient within mPFC, with increasingly ventral activation being increasingly associated with self-related judgment”
    • Also stated in: § Discerning the Spatial and Functional Organization of mPFC · plain
      “Thus, the present data argue that the representation of processes supporting judgments about the self and others in mPFC is organized as a gradient rather than discrete modules.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Study design and conductcitation

    All contrasts were coded by at least 2 trained coders, and disagreements were arbitrated after independent coding.

    “All contrasts were coded by at least 2 trained coders. Any disagreements between coders were arbitrated after independent coding in order to any resolve any discrepancies (Kober et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kober et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Study design and conductown data

    Results survived whole-brain correction if they met height-based criteria alone or cluster extent-based criteria, with all thresholds significant at p<0.05, FWE-corrected.

    “Results survived whole-brain correction if they either met height-based criteria alone (i.e. sufficiently large activation proportion differential, regardless of extent), or if they met cluster extent-based criteria. Height (i.e. activation proportion) and extent thresholds varied for each MKDA, but all were significant at p<0.05, FWE-corrected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Study design and conductnone given

    The binary logistic regression analysis was independent of the MKDA and independent of any spatial smoothing.

    “Using a binary logistic regression analysis that was independent of the MKDA and independent of any spatial smoothing, we found that self or other judgment status was significantly predicted by location along the dorsal-ventral axis in mPFC.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Increasingly ventral mPFC is more associated with processing self-relevant judgments, whereas dorsal mPFC is relatively more attuned to focusing attention on making judgments about the external world.

    “Thus, increasingly ventral mPFC is more associated with processing self-relevant judgments, whereas dorsal mPFC is relatively more attuned to focusing attention on making judgments about the external world.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationcitation

    Caudate body activity may reflect a connection between self-focused mentalizing and generalized reward processing.

    “In addition, the caudate body activity reported here may reflect a connection between self-focused mentalizing and generalized reward processing, consistent with the notion that there are inherently rewarding aspects to the self (Enzi, de Greck, Prosch, Tempelmann, & Northoff, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Enzi, de Greck, Prosch, Tempelmann, & Northoff, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Connectivity analyses within anterior mPFC have revealed a ventrally mediated viscerolimbic affective and self-relevance network and a dorsally mediated cognitive network.

    “Connectivity analyses within anterior mPFC have revealed a ventrally mediated viscerolimbic affective and self-relevance network (with connections to amygdala, insula, and nucleus accumbens) and a dorsally mediated cognitive network (with connections to dorsolateral PFC and hippocampus) (Kim & Whalen, 2009; Price, Carmichael, & Drevets, 1996; Schmitz & Johnson, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Kim & Whalen, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Price, Carmichael, & Drevets, 1996 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Schmitz & Johnson, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Premisecitation

    vmPFC supports relatively stimulus-driven processes that may be important for computing the value of stimuli in a current judgment context, whereas dmPFC supports more reflective processes used for selecting higher level social and affective meanings.

    “This view is also consistent with the notion, derived from a recent review of the functional neuroimaging literature, that vmPFC supports relatively stimulus-driven processes that may be important for computing the value of stimuli in a current judgment context, whereas dmPFC supports more reflective processes used for selecting higher level social and affective meanings (Olsson & Ochsner, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Olsson & Ochsner, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Contrasts comparing only the categories represented at the end-points of a gradient can only show apparent double dissociations; detecting a gradient requires a finer-grained analysis that takes into account regions spanning the end points.

    “In all cases, contrasts comparing only the categories represented at the end-points of a gradient can only show apparent double dissociations. In order to detect a gradient, one needs a finer-grained analysis that takes into account regions spanning the end points - as we did with the logistic regression used here.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Premisecitation

    Gusnard and colleagues (2001) found internally-directed (self-referential) attention to be more associated with dorsal mPFC activity.

    “It is notable, however, that Gusnard and colleagues (2001) addressed this question with a neuroimaging task involving internally versus externally-directed attention and came to a divergent conclusion, finding internally-directed (self-referential) attention to be more associated with dorsal mPFC activity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gusnard et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

26 of 26

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The null hypothesis for the Monte Carlo simulation was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.

    “The null hypothesis was a uniform random distribution of peaks within each comparison in gray matter in the standard brain.”
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?

  • Ex-partner versus Friend was predicted by increased activity in dmPFC, right TPJ, precuneus, and other regions associated with negative emotion and its regulation.

    “Ex-partner versus Friend was predicted by increased activity in dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), right temporal parietal junction (TPJ) and precuneus, which are reliably associated with mentalizing about others38,39, and several other regions associated with negative emotion and its regulation20,40,41, including thalamus, supplementary motor area and inferior frontal gyrus.”

    From Separate neural representations for physical pain and social rejection (2014) · cites this paper as [38]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Denny, B. T., Kober, H., Wager, T. D., & Ochsner, K. N.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • 2Yale University
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press - Journals
Published
2012-08-01
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
1742-1752
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
DOI
10.1162/jocn_a_00233
PMC
PMC3806720
OpenAlex
W2121677155
Semantic Scholar
ed0070456b9770cbce9d09e1ff1311a2be401caa
Cited by
830
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 66 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 73 · 2016: 66 · 2015: 59 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 9
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Neurosciences Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R21 MH528021, R01MH076137, R21MH082308)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD069178)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
self-other judgment, mentalization, medial prefrontal cortex, functional heterogeneity, anterior temporal pole, posterior cingulate cortex, insula, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, self-referential processing
MeSH terms
Humans, Self Concept, Prefrontal Cortex, Theory of Mind, Functional Neuroimaging

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