ArticleBrain structure & function2026
Comparing design students' inter-brain synchrony between face-to-face and online collaborations.
Article in Brain structure & function, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid digitalisation of design education has fundamentally altered how students collaborate; however, the cognitive and neurophysiological dynamics underlying online creative co-creation remain poorly understood. To address this, we conducted an exploratory pilot study (N = 11 dyads) employing a multimodal paradigm that integrated behavioural protocol analysis with fNIRS hyperscanning. Specifically, this study examined the effects of collaborative modality (face-to-face versus online via Zoom) and interactional behaviours between design students on neural coupling, utilising Phase Locking Value (PLV) to quantify inter-brain synchrony (IBS). The results revealed an inversion between observable behaviour and underlying neural synchrony. In face-to-face settings, dyads spent the majority of their time communicating verbally, yet their highest levels of IBS were associated with sketching. Conversely, although participants sketched significantly more often in the online environment, the neural coupling previously associated with sketching collapsed. Instead, verbal communication emerged as the primary correlate of enhanced IBS in the digital space. These initial findings indicate that online collaborative dyads may rely more heavily on explicit verbal channels to maintain cognitive alignment. Crucially, because generative "Solution Space" activities inherently demand the visual externalisation of ideas, this disruption of sketching-associated neural coupling raises the theoretical hypothesis that remote environments may leave students more susceptible to misaligned mental models or design fixation during the solution exploration phases. It also highlights a critical avenue for future outcome-based research.
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.