Alleinerziehende Mutterschaft

Abstract

Alleinerziehend sind nach wie vor hauptsächlich die Mütter, die - zumindest im Kontext des Rechts - als auf die Geldzahlungen der Kindesväter Wartende konstruiert werden. Wie genau denkt das Recht also diese Form der Mutterschaft und welches Familienbild liegt hier zugrunde? Um diesen Fragen nachzugehen, betrachtet Anna Kastens transdisziplinäre Studie die Mitwirkung der alleinerziehenden Mütter bei der Feststellung der Vaterschaft im Unterhaltsvorschussgesetz in Deutschland und im Gesetz über Familienleistungen in Polen. Alleinerziehende Mutterschaft erweist sich hierbei als Technologie einer heteronormativen Familienordnung.

Integrating electric field modelling and neuroimaging to explain inter-individual variability of tACS effects

“…While the current flow radial to the cortical surface (or normal component of the electric field) determines the strength of somatic polarization of cortical pyramidal cells, the current flow radial to the cortical surface polarizes horizontally arranged cortico-cortical axons 56 . In principle, these different components of the electric field could differentially contrib- Kasten et al, 2019 Individual differences in electric fields explain tACS variability 18 ute to stimulation effects. Models could incorporate this contribution by computing spatial correlations with the brain activity of interest and the strength parameter for each of the field directions.…”

“…6a-d). Source projected α-power significantly increased after tACS (pcluster < .001), and showed a trend towards increased α-power after sham stimulation (pcluster Kasten et al, 2019 Individual differences in electric fields explain tACS variability 12 = .08). Again, there was no significant difference in the neighboring β-(pcluster > .…”

“…To index the STRENGTH of stimulation inside the brain, we identified the 10,000 voxels inside the grey and white matter compartments of each subjects' simulation result showing highest electric field magnitude and computed the average electric field magnitude across these voxels. Kasten et al, 2019 Individual differences in electric fields explain tACS variability 25 To evaluate whether these measures of electric field differences account for the variability of our outcome measure, we modelled each subject's power increase within the ROIs as a function of CONDITION (tACS vs. sham), PRECISIONSpat, STRENGTH and PRECISIONFreq with a multiple linear regression model. PRECISIONFreq captures the mismatch between the pre-determined stimulation frequency (sf) and the dominant frequency (df) observed during the baseline block (mismatch = sf -df), extracted from the average spectrum over all sensors.…”

“…However, if and to which extent these differences explain variability of tES effects on behavioral or physiological outcome measures remains elusive. Kasten et al, 2019 Individual differences in electric fields explain tACS variability 4…”

“…We integrated individual simulations of electric fields during tES with source-localization to predict variability of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) aftereffects on α-oscillations. In Kasten et al, 2019 Individual differences in electric fields explain tACS variability 2 two experiments, participants received 20 minutes of either α-tACS (1 mA) or sham stimulation.Magnetoencephalogram was recorded for 10 minutes before and after stimulation. tACS caused a larger power increase in the α-band as compared to sham.…”