Cited by 300Narrative Theory and AnalysisAction Observation and SynchronizationMedia Influence and Health

Same Story, Different Story: The Neural Representation of Interpretive Frameworks

Open access
Yeshurun, Yaara, Swanson, Stephen, Simony, Erez, Chen, Janice, Lazaridi, Christina, Honey, Christopher J., Hasson, Uri·2017·Psychological Science

Abstract

Differences in people’s beliefs can substantially impact their interpretation of a series of events. In this functional MRI study, we manipulated subjects’ beliefs, leading two groups of subjects to interpret the same narrative in different ways. We found that responses in higher-order brain areas—including the default-mode network, language areas, and subsets of the mirror neuron system—tended to be similar among people who shared the same interpretation, but different from those of people with an opposing interpretation. Furthermore, the difference in neural responses between the two groups at each moment was correlated with the magnitude of the difference in the interpretation of the narrative. This study demonstrates that brain responses to the same event tend to cluster together among people who share the same views.

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 · 10.1177/0956797616682029

Cites

52 of 52 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?

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
Yeshurun, Y., Swanson, S., Simony, E., Chen, J., Lazaridi, C., Honey, C. J., & Hasson, U.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Yeshurun, Yaara
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2017-01-18
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
307-319
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2575773685
Cited by
300
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 1
FWCI
362.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH094480)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
Keywords
narrative interpretation, shared interpretation, default mode network, mirror neuron system, language areas, social cognition
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Social Perception, Young Adult, Theory of Mind

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