ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Arbitrary methodological decisions skew inter-brain synchronization estimates in hyperscanning-EEG studies.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inducing Interpersonal Closeness: Effects on Inter-Brain Synchrony and Collaborative Performance.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Toward an Understanding of the Psychological Meaning of Physiological Synchrony.Psychophysiology · 2026Review
- Multi-brain neurofeedback: what are we training for?Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026Review
- Investigating interbrain synchrony under teamwork disruption: an fNIRS hyperscanning study.Behavioral and brain functions : BBF · 2026Article
- Testing the causal relationship between interpersonal closeness and inter-brain synchrony.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A two-person neuroscience perspective on parent-infant dyadic expansion of consciousness.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Collaborative rule learning promotes interbrain information alignment.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Stage 1 registered report examining agency and outcome valence on inter-brain synchrony during dyadic moral judgments.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Now is the time: operationalizing generative neurophenomenology through interpersonal methods.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2025Article
- Abstractness and social interaction through a new lens: the potentialities of hyperscanning in naturalistic settings.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- A practical guide to EEG hyperscanning in joint action research: from motivation to implementation.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past decade, hyperscanning has emerged as an important methodology to study neural processes underlying human interaction using fMRI, EEG, fNIRS, and MEG. However, many methodological decisions regarding preprocessing and analysis of hyperscanning data have not yet been standardized in the hyperscanning community, yet may affect inter-brain estimates. Here, we systematically investigate the effects common methodological choices can have on estimates of phase-based inter-brain synchronization (IBS) measures, using real and simulated hyperscanning (dual) EEG data. Notably, we introduce a new method to compute circular correlation coefficients in IBS studies, which performs more reliably in comparison to the standard approach, showing that the conventional circular correlation implementation leads to large fluctuations in IBS estimates due to fluctuations in circular mean directions. Furthermore, we demonstrate how short epoch durations (of 1 s or less) can lead to inflated IBS estimates in scenarios with no strong underlying interaction. Finally, we show how signal-to-noise ratios and temporal factors may confound IBS estimates, particularly when comparing, for example, resting states with conditions involving motor actions. For each of these investigated effects, we provide recommendations for future research employing hyperscanning-EEG techniques, aimed at increasing validity and replicability of inter-brain synchronization studies.
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.