2018
DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00220
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gender Differences in Global Functional Connectivity During Facial Emotion Processing: A Visual MMN Study

Abstract: To investigate gender differences in functional connectivity during the unattended processing of facial expressions, we recorded visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) in 34 adults using a deviant-standard reverse oddball paradigm. Using wavelet analysis, we calculated the time-frequency (TF) power at each electrode associated with happy-deviant, sad-deviant, happy-standard and sad-standard conditions. We also calculated the phase lag index (PLI) between electrode pairs and analyzed the dynamic network topologies o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
1
24
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Much of the previous work on sex differences in the human brain have focused on anatomical features, such as volume, surface area, and white matter track attributes [23][24][25][26] . However, there is growing evidence of sex differences in functional connectivity as well 23,25,[27][28][29] . A recent machine learning approach was able to accurately classify sex based on rsFC, with many of the most substantial differences in the frontal regions 28 , supporting related earlier studies of neural sex differences 30,31 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much of the previous work on sex differences in the human brain have focused on anatomical features, such as volume, surface area, and white matter track attributes [23][24][25][26] . However, there is growing evidence of sex differences in functional connectivity as well 23,25,[27][28][29] . A recent machine learning approach was able to accurately classify sex based on rsFC, with many of the most substantial differences in the frontal regions 28 , supporting related earlier studies of neural sex differences 30,31 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To account for this additional activity, several suggestions are made: (i) different characteristics of the tasks performed during scanning, (ii) gender mismatch between pianists and controls in Meister et al (10 female subjects & 2 male subjects for pianists vs 7 female subjects & 5 male subjects for controls), and (iii) gender mismatch within the pianist group in Meister et al (10 female subjects vs 2 male subjects). Considering the last decade's findings that have reported differences in functional connectivity and network topology between women and men in various cognitive tasks (Douw et al 2011;Gootjes et al 2006;Pavlova et al, 2015;Tomasi and Volkow 2012;Zhang et al 2018), it seems methodologically justified to match genders between and within groups.…”
Section: Investigating Fractional Anisotropy (Fa) Changes Induced By mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The significance level was set at p < 0.05, and high significance was set at p < 0.01. The previously described methods of statistical analysis have been verified by other experimental studies (Zhang et al, 2018 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 63%