SynthesisBrain and behavior2026
A Meta-Analysis of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies on In-Group and Out-Group Categorization.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSystematic variations in neural activation patterns during processing of group categorization is a facet often overlooked in extant meta-analyses that typically treated all group memberships and task types as homogenous entities. Recognizing the necessity to differentiate between various group memberships and task types due to them eliciting distinct neural activity, our study addressed this gap by conducting a more fine-grained exploration.
methodsA comprehensive meta-analytic approach using the activation likelihood estimation (ALE) following PRISMA guidelines was employed. Inclusion criteria were task-fMRI studies, whole-brain analyses in a standard stereotaxic space, involved healthy adults, and published in English. Meta-analyses were performed using GingerALE.
resultsOverall in-group > out-group (IG>OG) processing included 66 studies (108 contrasts, 518 foci), and ALE analysis revealed 22 significant clusters, with the largest (3328 mm
conclusionOur unrestricted search approach with ALE methodology extends beyond previous categorically constrained meta-analyses by capturing group dynamics not limited to predefined categories. The distinct activation patterns for ethnicity-based categorization and empathy processing tasks indicate multiple neural pathways rather than universal mechanisms for group processing. These context-dependent patterns suggest interventions must target specific group-task combinations rather than assume uniform neural processes.
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.