ArticleCommunications biology2026
The neural correlates of shared and individual experience.
Article in Communications biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
We set out to explore the neural correlates of individual-specific experiences. We propose an approach through which we compute individual-specific dynamics of functional connectivity states. These dynamics do not require estimation of common states across individuals and can be directly related to dynamic behavioural ratings of subjective experience. To this end, we leverage a unique functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset where subjects listened to an engaging naturalistic story while awake and under different levels of anaesthesia, altering or abolishing conscious experience. We find that this method can detect correspondences between neural and subjective dynamics. We then show that the dynamics of the default mode network are more dissimilar between participants during awareness compared to unconsciousness and therefore may tend to underlie more personal experiences of the story. On the other hand, the auditory and posterior dorsal attention networks show higher inter-subject similarity in consciousness compared to unconsciousness and suggest that the dynamics of these networks support more "generalisable" experiences of the story. We further characterise individual-specific brain dynamics by showing that they are associated with higher complexity in consciousness, whilst conversely, brain dynamics underlying shared experience become less complex during the conscious experience of the story.
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.