ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Idiosyncratic patterns of interhemispheric connectivity in the face and scene networks of the human brain.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Functional resilience of the neural visual recognition system post-pediatric occipitotemporal resection.iScience · 2024Article
- Bidirectional and Cross-Hemispheric Modulations of Face-Selective Neural Activity Induced by Electrical Stimulation within the Human Cortical Face Network.Brain sciences · 2024Article
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
Neuroimaging studies have revealed a network of regions in both hemispheres of the human brain that respond selectively to faces. Neural models of face processing have typically focused on functional connectivity between regions in the same hemisphere (intrahemispheric), with a particular bias toward the right hemisphere. Here, we explored the role of interhemispheric connectivity using fMRI. We used three datasets to compare functional connectivity, as shown by correlations between the time-courses of neural activity of face regions during different natural viewing paradigms. We found higher correlations of neural activity between corresponding interhemispheric regions (e.g., rFFA-lFFA) than between intrahemispheric regions (e.g., rFFA-rOFA), indicating a bias towards higher interhemispheric than intrahemispheric connectivity. A similar interhemispheric bias was evident in scene-selective regions. In contrast, we did not find an interhemispheric bias in early visual regions (V1-V3), where intrahemispheric connectivity between corresponding regions was generally higher than interhemispheric connectivity. Next, we asked whether the higher interhemispheric connectivity in the face and scene networks between corresponding regions was consistent across participants. We found that the interhemispheric bias was significantly attenuated when we compared the time-course of response across participants. This shows that interhemispheric bias in connectivity between corresponding regions in the face and scene networks is specific to the individual. These findings raise the possibility that idiosyncratic variation in interhemispheric connectivity may explain individual differences in perception.
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.