These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

278 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30357662)

  • 1. Functional connectivity of specific resting-state networks predicts trust and reciprocity in the trust game.
    Bellucci G; Hahn T; Deshpande G; Krueger F
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2019 Feb; 19(1):165-176. PubMed ID: 30357662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Organization of intrinsic functional brain connectivity predicts decisions to reciprocate social behavior.
    Cáceda R; James GA; Gutman DA; Kilts CD
    Behav Brain Res; 2015 Oct; 292():478-83. PubMed ID: 26166191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Connectome-based individualized prediction of reciprocity propensity and sensitivity to framing: a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study.
    Fang H; Liao C; Fu Z; Tian S; Luo Y; Xu P; Krueger F
    Cereb Cortex; 2023 Mar; 33(6):3193-3206. PubMed ID: 35788651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The connectome-based prediction of trust propensity in older adults: A resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study.
    Chen Y; He H; Lin W; Yang J; Tan S; Tao W; Guan Q; Krueger F
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2023 Aug; 44(11):4337-4351. PubMed ID: 37278571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Neural signatures of trust in reciprocity: A coordinate-based meta-analysis.
    Bellucci G; Chernyak SV; Goodyear K; Eickhoff SB; Krueger F
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2017 Mar; 38(3):1233-1248. PubMed ID: 27859899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Intrinsic brain activity patterns across large-scale networks predict reciprocity propensity.
    Li T; Pei Z; Zhu Z; Wu X; Feng C
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2022 Dec; 43(18):5616-5629. PubMed ID: 36054523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Resting-state Functional Connectivity and Deception: Exploring Individualized Deceptive Propensity by Machine Learning.
    Tang H; Lu X; Cui Z; Feng C; Lin Q; Cui X; Su S; Liu C
    Neuroscience; 2018 Dec; 395():101-112. PubMed ID: 30394323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. To trust, or not to trust? Individual differences in physiological reactivity predict trust under acute stress.
    Potts SR; McCuddy WT; Jayan D; Porcelli AJ
    Psychoneuroendocrinology; 2019 Feb; 100():75-84. PubMed ID: 30292962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The neural correlates of reciprocity are sensitive to prior experience of reciprocity.
    Cáceda R; Prendes-Alvarez S; Hsu JJ; Tripathi SP; Kilts CD; James GA
    Behav Brain Res; 2017 Aug; 332():136-144. PubMed ID: 28551067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Connectome-based model predicts individual differences in propensity to trust.
    Lu X; Li T; Xia Z; Zhu R; Wang L; Luo YJ; Feng C; Krueger F
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2019 Apr; 40(6):1942-1954. PubMed ID: 30633429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Intrinsic functional connectivity of the frontoparietal network predicts inter-individual differences in the propensity for costly third-party punishment.
    Yang Q; Bellucci G; Hoffman M; Hsu KT; Lu B; Deshpande G; Krueger F
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2021 Dec; 21(6):1222-1232. PubMed ID: 34331267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Risk seeking for losses modulates the functional connectivity of the default mode and left frontoparietal networks in young males.
    Deza Araujo YI; Nebe S; Neukam PT; Pooseh S; Sebold M; Garbusow M; Heinz A; Smolka MN
    Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci; 2018 Jun; 18(3):536-549. PubMed ID: 29616472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Intrinsic functional connectivity predicts individual differences in distractibility.
    Poole VN; Robinson ME; Singleton O; DeGutis J; Milberg WP; McGlinchey RE; Salat DH; Esterman M
    Neuropsychologia; 2016 Jun; 86():176-82. PubMed ID: 27132070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Trust as commodity: social value orientation affects the neural substrates of learning to cooperate.
    Lambert B; Declerck CH; Emonds G; Boone C
    Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci; 2017 Apr; 12(4):609-617. PubMed ID: 28119509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Trust and reciprocity: are effort and money equivalent?
    Vilares I; Dam G; Kording K
    PLoS One; 2011 Feb; 6(2):e17113. PubMed ID: 21364931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The spiral of distrust: (Non-)cooperation in a repeated trust game is predicted by anger and individual differences in negative reciprocity orientation.
    Harth NS; Regner T
    Int J Psychol; 2017 Dec; 52 Suppl 1():18-25. PubMed ID: 26865362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Intrinsic network interactions explain individual differences in mentalizing ability in adolescents.
    van Buuren M; Lee NC; Vegting I; Walsh RJ; Sijtsma H; Hollarek M; Krabbendam L
    Neuropsychologia; 2021 Jan; 151():107737. PubMed ID: 33383039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Role of the right temporoparietal junction in intergroup bias in trust decisions.
    Fujino J; Tei S; Itahashi T; Aoki YY; Ohta H; Kubota M; Hashimoto RI; Takahashi H; Kato N; Nakamura M
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2020 Apr; 41(6):1677-1688. PubMed ID: 31854496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Developmental Changes and Individual Differences in Trust and Reciprocity in Adolescence.
    van de Groep S; Meuwese R; Zanolie K; Güroğlu B; Crone EA
    J Res Adolesc; 2020 Jan; 30 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):192-208. PubMed ID: 30325088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Coupling and segregation of large-scale brain networks predict individual differences in delay discounting.
    Chen Z; Guo Y; Suo T; Feng T
    Biol Psychol; 2018 Mar; 133():63-71. PubMed ID: 29382543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.