Dataset Information

Why Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study.

ABSTRACT: People often find it hard to disagree with others, but how this disposition varies across individuals or how it is influenced by social factors like other people's level of expertise remains little understood. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we found that activity across a network of brain areas [comprising posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), anterior insula (AI), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and angular gyrus] was modulated by individual differences in the frequency with which participants actively disagreed with statements made by others. Specifically, participants who disagreed less frequently exhibited greater brain activation in these areas when they actually disagreed. Given the role of this network in cognitive dissonance, our results suggest that some participants had more trouble disagreeing due to a heightened cognitive dissonance response. Contrary to expectation, the level of expertise (high or low) had no effect on behavior or brain activity.

SUBMITTER: Dominguez D JF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4731490 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study.

Domínguez D Juan F JF Taing Sreyneth A SA Molenberghs Pascal P

Frontiers in human neuroscience 20160129

People often find it hard to disagree with others, but how this disposition varies across individuals or how it is influenced by social factors like other people's level of expertise remains little understood. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we found that activity across a network of brain areas [comprising posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), anterior insula (AI), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and angular gyrus] was modulated by individual di ...[more]

PMID: 26858629

Similar Datasets

Project description:Both post-contrast myocardial T1 and extracellular volume (ECV) measurements have been associated with diffuse interstitial fibrosis. The cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) field is migrating towards ECV, because it is largely insensitive to confounders that affect post-contrast myocardial T1 . Despite the theoretical advantages of myocardial ECV over post-contrast myocardial T1 , systematic experimental studies comparing the two measurements are largely lacking. We sought to measure the temporal changes in post-contrast myocardial T1 and ECV in an established canine model with chronic atrial fibrillation. Seventeen mongrel dogs, implanted with a pacemaker to induce chronic atrial fibrillation via rapid atrial pacing, were scanned multiple times for a total of 46 CMR scans at 3T. These dogs with different disease durations (0-22 months) were part of a separate longitudinal study aimed at studying the relationship between AF and pathophysiology. In each animal, we measured native and post-contrast T1 values and hematocrit. Temporal changes in post-contrast myocardial T1 and ECV, as well as other CMR parameters, were modeled with linear mixed effect models to account for repeated measurements over disease duration. In 17 animals, post-contrast myocardial T1 decreased significantly from 872 to 698 ms (p < 0.001), which corresponds to a 24.9% relative reduction. In contrast, ECV increased from 21.0 to 22.0% (p = 0.38), which corresponds to only a 4.5% relative increase. To partially investigate this discrepancy, we quantified collagen volume fraction (CVF) in post-mortem heart tissues of six canines sacrificed at different disease durations (0-22 months). CVF quantified by histology increased from 0.9 to 1.9% (p = 0.56), which agrees better with ECV than with post-contrast myocardial T1 . This study shows that post-contrast myocardial T1 and ECV may disagree in a longitudinal canine study. A more comprehensive study, including histologic, cardiac, and renal functional analyses, is warranted to test rigorously which CMR parameter (ECV or post-contrast myocardial T1 ) agrees better with CVF.

Project description:BackgroundPublic involvement in clinical translational research is increasingly recognised as essential for relevant and reliable research. Public involvement must be diverse and inclusive to enable research that has the potential to reach those that stand to benefit from it the most, and thus address issues of health equity. Several recent reports, however, indicate that public involvement is exclusive, including in its interactions with ethnic groups. This paper outlines a novel community-led methodology - a community sandpit - to address the inclusion of ethnic groups in public involvement in research, reports on its evaluation, findings, legacy and impact.MethodsThrough detailed planning - thinking through and taking into account all stakeholders perspectives in the planning and design of the sandpit, relationship-building, co-design and co-delivery between the Public Programmes team based at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust and the Greater Manchester Black and Minority Ethnic Network - the community sandpit was held in July 2018.ResultsFifteen community organisations took part in the two-day event, as well as six researchers, and six creative practitioners. Six community-based partnership projects were seed-funded; four of these received additional funding from other sources also.ConclusionsEvaluation of the sandpit showed the format to be well-received by all: it levelled power relationships between community organisations, health researchers and research infrastructure; it developed capacity amongst researchers about the accessibility, role and potential of community organisations. Described as "not another community seed fund" by community partners, the sandpit offered community partners, equitable avenues for collaboration within Greater Manchester translational research and led to the formation of the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Research Advisory Group (BRAG Vocal Website information, - https://www.wearevocal.org/opportunities/black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-research-advisory-group-brag/ , 2021). The method has the potential to be replicated elsewhere to support inclusive public involvement in research and inclusive research.

Project description:IntroductionComprehensive studies mapping domain-specific trajectories of recovery after stroke and biomarkers reflecting these processes are scarce. We, therefore, initiated an exploratory prospective observational study of stroke cases with repeated evaluation, the FIND Stroke Recovery Study. We aim to capture trajectories of recovery from different impairments, including cognition, in combination with broad profiling of blood and imaging biomarkers of the recovery.Methods and analysisWe recruit individuals with first-ever stroke at the stroke unit at the Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden, to FIND. The inclusion started early 2018 and we aim to enrol minimum 500 patients. Neurological and cognitive impairments across multiple domains are assessed using validated clinical assessment methods, advanced neuroimaging is performed and blood samples for biomarker measuring (protein, RNA and DNA) at inclusion and follow-up visits at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years poststroke. At baseline and at each follow-up visit, we also register clinical variables known to influence outcomes such as prestroke functioning, stroke severity, acute interventions, rehabilitation, other treatments, socioeconomic status, infections (including COVID-19) and other comorbidities. Recurrent stroke and other major vascular events are identified continuously in national registers.Ethics and disseminationFIND composes a unique stroke cohort with detailed phenotyping, repetitive assessments of outcomes across multiple neurological and cognitive domains and patient-reported outcomes as well as blood and imaging biomarker profiling. Ethical approval for the FIND study has been obtained from the Regional Ethics Review Board in Gothenburg and the Swedish Ethics Review Board. The results of this exploratory study will provide novel data on the time course of recovery and biomarkers after stroke. The description of this protocol will inform the stroke research community of our ongoing study and facilitate comparisons with other data sets.Trial registration numberThe protocol is registered at http://www.Clinicaltrialsgov, Study ID: NCT05708807.

Dataset Information

Why Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study.

Publications

Why Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets