Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30753646›Full record

ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2019

When do we fall in neural synchrony with others?

Kelong Lu, Ning Hao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Brain-to-brain mechanisms underlying pain empathy and social modulation of pain in the patient-clinician interaction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kelong LuShanghai Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Ning HaoShanghai Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the situation in which interpersonal brain synchronization (IBS) occurs during a collaborative task and examined its trajectory over time by developing a novel functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS)-based hyperscanning paradigm. Participants were asked to perform a collaborative task in three-person groups where two of the members are real participants and one is a confederate. Compared to dyads between real participants and confederates, real-participant pairings showed greater cooperation behavior and IBS between bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. And, IBS and cooperation increased over time in real-participant pairings, whereas they remained low and constant in dyads with the confederate. These findings indicate that IBS occurs between individuals engaging in interpersonal interaction during a collaborative task, during which both IBS and cooperatively interpersonal interaction tend to increase over time.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorInterpersonal RelationsSocial BehaviorAdultBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMalePrefrontal CortexSpectroscopy, Near-InfraredYoung AdultfNIRShyperscanninginterpersonal brain synchronizationInterpersonal interaction

Identifiers

PMID30753646
PMCPMC6413689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.