Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34135466›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2021

Brain network reconfiguration for narrative and argumentative thought.

Yangwen Xu, Lorenzo Vignali, Olivier Collignon, Davide Crepaldi, Roberto Bottini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Yangwen XuCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Trento, Italy. yangwen.xu@unitn.it.ORCID 0000-0003-1482-4927
Lorenzo VignaliCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
Olivier CollignonCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
Davide CrepaldiInternational School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Trieste, Italy.
Roberto BottiniCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Trento, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our brain constructs reality through narrative and argumentative thought. Some hypotheses argue that these two modes of cognitive functioning are irreducible, reflecting distinct mental operations underlain by separate neural bases; Others ascribe both to a unitary neural system dedicated to long-timescale information. We addressed this question by employing inter-subject measures to investigate the stimulus-induced neural responses when participants were listening to narrative and argumentative texts during fMRI. We found that following both kinds of texts enhanced functional couplings within the frontoparietal control system. However, while a narrative specifically implicated the default mode system, an argument specifically induced synchronization between the intraparietal sulcus in the frontoparietal control system and multiple perisylvian areas in the language system. Our findings reconcile the two hypotheses by revealing commonalities and differences between the narrative and the argumentative brain networks, showing how diverse mental activities arise from the segregation and integration of the existing brain systems.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBrainBrain MappingCognitionFemaleHumansLanguageMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetThinkingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34135466
PMCPMC8208997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.