ArticleComputational brain & behavior2020
Measures of Neural Similarity.
Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finding agreement: Functional magnetic resonance imaging hyperscanning reveals that mental state space exploration facilitates opinion alignment.Journal of personality and social psychology · 2026Article
- Low-dimensional and optimised representations of high-level information in the expert brain.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Review
- Qualities, subjectivity and spatial extension: is there a common factor?Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Adaptive stretching of representations across brain regions and deep learning model layers.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Compositionality in the semantic network: a model-driven representational similarity analysis.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Context flexibly modulates cue representations in visual cortex.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Multi-voxel pattern analysis for developmental cognitive neuroscientists.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2025Review
- Semantic fMRI neurofeedback of emotions: from basic principles to clinical applications.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Hyperscanning shows friends explore and strangers converge in conversation.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Connectivity analyses for task-based fMRI.Physics of life reviews · 2024Review
- Deconstructing the Mapper algorithm to extract richer topological and temporal features from functional neuroimaging data.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Stimulus Repetition and Sample Size Considerations in Item-Level Representational Similarity Analysis.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2024Article
- Deconstructing the Mapper algorithm to extract richer topological and temporal features from functional neuroimaging data.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Identifying causal subsequent memory effects.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Article
- Improving the validity of neuroimaging decoding tests of invariant and configural neural representation.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Exploring the role of structuralist methodology in the neuroscience of consciousness: a defense and analysis.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2023Article
- Visual object categorization in infancy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Constructing neural network models from brain data reveals representational transformations linked to adaptive behavior.Nature communications · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
One fundamental question is what makes two brain states similar. For example, what makes the activity in visual cortex elicited from viewing a robin similar to a sparrow? One common assumption in fMRI analysis is that neural similarity is described by Pearson correlation. However, there are a host of other possibilities, including Minkowski and Mahalanobis measures, with each differing in its mathematical, theoretical, and neural computational assumptions. Moreover, the operable measures may vary across brain regions and tasks. Here, we evaluated which of several competing similarity measures best captured neural similarity. Our technique uses a decoding approach to assess the information present in a brain region, and the similarity measures that best correspond to the classifier's confusion matrix are preferred. Across two published fMRI datasets, we found the preferred neural similarity measures were common across brain regions but differed across tasks. Moreover, Pearson correlation was consistently surpassed by alternatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.