@gabrielbraun
Finally arrived on Bluesky. Neuroscience PhD student at Tel Aviv University. Social neuroscience, trust/belief, misinformation, language and communication. Film enthusiast. 🏳️🌈 https://gabrielbrauncog.github.io/
Btw, do you (in general) have the same thoughts regarding anendophasia? It seems to follow the same rational of not the most essential source of simulation (but intuitively feels relevant to emotion regulation,or lackof in case of some OCDs). But I guess there's not much research on anendophasia yet
Letters are also much shorter and to the-point. Which can also be of great value :)
It’s been half a year since this publication in @pnas.org, which means it’s now fully open access :)
If you’re interested in how belief and disbelief shape the way we process narratives and information, take a look!
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
My favourite part of writing is naming studies/proposals after somewhat obscure films, feeling clever until a peer deletes the title without mercy.
This round: 'The Self of Another', inspired by 'The Face of Another'.
This project wouldn’t have come together without the amazing team -- Tomer Zipori and @louisteitelbaum.bsky.social for the heavy lifting and computational analysis, @lewan.bsky.social for his insight, and @profsanderlinden.bsky.social whose vision made this possible. Truly grateful for this!
The Timbre of Lies
Ever feel like people who believe the same story are on the same wavelength? Their brains might just be.
🤍
New preprint alert! 🐥
"Continued memory for misinformation, continued trust in the sources that spread it: The effects of language and self-correction".
In my completely unbiased opinion, it’s a very nice and interesting read!
Full paper at: doi.org/10.31234/osf...
But wont most random people (not philosophers/scientists) percieve color to be more of a physical property? I think it will be a very skewed split of responses
There are things similar to pain, like heat/cold. But maybe something being 'beautiful'? You can see it as your own perception or the object/scene having some kind of "physical" beautiful properties? Doesn't 100% fit, but somewhat close
Looks really cool. Congratz to all involved! Can't wait to read it more thoroughly :)
Great job and congratulations!
NEW preprint!
We study cases with several meanings (e.g., replying “I’m feeling sick” to “Wanna go to the beach?”). How does being truthful in one meaning, but maybe not another, shape perceived commitment to each meaning and overall trust in a speaker?
doi.org/10.31234/osf...
Shared disbelief and shared belief: Belief and disbelief as drivers of interpersonal neural synchronization during narrative processing @PNAS.org
Bed-bound with high fever, while now and then having to run to a shelter filled with children. So.... seems like the right time to write and share my second substack post: "How scientific value is too often measured in dollars"
open.substack.com/pub/gabrielb...
Just me trying to write some words about belief, without having to be too formal and in APA7
open.substack.com/pub/gabrielb...
Neat! Congratulations and good job!
My intuition was: less visual imagery -> probably more 'rational' (?)-> more leaning towards deterministic views in general + anti free will views
But maybe it's just me basing it on myself (I can't even imagine my parents, they're just blobs)
Neat! Also happy to personally correspond with the correlation's direction
Totally agree there’s a lack of neuroscientific work on misinformation. Honestly, even the basics of belief vs. disbelief in information is surprisingly underexplored.
We just released a new paper, and our very first sentence makes exactly that point.
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
Together, the results show how (dis)belief shapes narrative processing. Behaviorally, belief bias supports the notion of belief as a cognitive default, while neural patterns show belief and disbelief drive distinct processing, shared across like-minded listeners. 6/6
Neural synchrony associated with actual belief revealed broader patterns. High belief and high disbelief led to distinct activation patterns, which were unique to each narrative. This suggests shared interpretations shaped by how much participants believed (or disbelieved). 5/6
Now to brain processing: context shaped neural synchrony. Some regions synced more in belief contexts, others in disbelief, but never both. Disbelief boosted synchrony in cognitive control regions (Exp 1) + DMN (Exp 2, pic), while belief was focused in the DMN (Exp 2, pic). 4/6
Let’s start with behavior: did actual belief match the context? The answer was no! Even when told the witness was lying, many still chose to believe. And the mismatch wasn’t random, it consistently leaned toward belief. Some call it “truth bias,” but I prefer belief bias. 3/6
In practice, participants heard testimonies under belief/disbelief contexts while we scanned their brain activity. Afterward, they rated how much they actually believed the speaker. We then asked: how synchronized were their brains with others? And did belief boost synchrony? 2/6
How do belief and disbelief shape how the brain processes narratives? Unlike discrete facts, narratives push us to actively build interpretations. We manipulated contextual belief (told if the speaker is lying/truthful) and measured actual belief. Then looked at the brain. 1/6
For my first BlueSky post I want to share this freshly published paper in PNAS @pnas.org!
We show how belief and disbelief shape narrative processing in the brain, not just as opposites of a continuum, but as distinct effects, including a cool truth/belief bias.
www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...