论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较两种共情范式的神经生理机制的差异。方法:通过检索Pub Med和Web of science等数据库,要求(1)研究正常成年人的共情能力的f MRI研究;(2)采用Talairach或者MNI系统报告脑区,且能从原文中获得完整的数据;(3)采用基于面部图片的范式和基于肢体部分图片的范式中的任意一种。对符合需要的22篇基于身体部分图片范式的文章和21篇基于面部图片范式的文章使用Ginger 2.3软件计算共情的脑区激活似然(ALE)估计值,得到脑区分布。结果:两种不同的共情对比结果显示,基于身体部分图片的共情范式显著激活了左侧顶下小叶部分,而基于面孔图片的范式则显著激活了额中回区域。结论:基于身体部分图片的共情范式中共情反应的产生可能是一个自动化的过程,需要较少的认知努力,而基于面孔图片的范式中的共情反应的产生则需要更多的认知努力。
Aims: To compare the differences in neurophysiological mechanisms between two empathy paradigms. Methods: (1) f MRI studies to study the empathic ability of normal adults by searching databases such as Pub Med and Web of science; (2) using the Talairach or MNI system to report brain regions and to obtain complete Data; (3) using any one of the facial picture based paradigm and the body part based picture paradigm. Twenty-two articles based on the body part picture paradigm and 21 articles based on the facial picture paradigm were fit to the needs. The brain region distribution was obtained by using the Ginger 2.3 software to calculate the brain activation likelihood (ALE) estimate of empathy. Results: Two different empathy comparisons showed that the empathy pattern based on body part images significantly activated the left inferior parietal lobule fraction, whereas the facial image based paradigm significantly activated the midbrain area. CONCLUSIONS: The production of empathy in empathy paradigms based on body part images may be an automated process requiring less cognitive effort, whereas the production of empathy in paradigms based on face pictures requires more cognition Work hard.