Sign in

Mark Thornton

@markthornton.bsky.social
2.2K followers 754 following 328 posts

Social neuroscientist studying how people understand and predict each other. Assistant Professor at Dartmouth College. markallenthornton.com

PostsRepliesMedia
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 11/09/2026
The psychology job market may be showing some early signs of regaining strength, relative to last year. A week ago last year, fewer than 200 jobs had been listed - today, it is nearly 300, a figure we didn't hit till early October in '25. #psychjobs #neurojobs #academicjobs
Bar graph showing the number of academic jobs in psychology by area over the years from 2007-2026.
47515
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
They also show that there is more to explain! Because even together the mechanisms we investigate here only partially mediated the relationship between neural reponses and trait ratings.
Neural encoding of trait impression updating. Brain regions within which pattern similarity is correlated with rated trait similarity of target people as participants watch SEND videos. Panels illustrate A) zero-order associations, B) residual associations after controlling for face, voice, and semantic modalities, and C) residual associations controlling for these modalities plus computational operations of compression, fusion, integration, and prediction. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
At the individual difference level, we found several regions within which differences in intersubject correlation were correlated with individual differences in trait updating.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
We also found evidence that 3/4 of the computational operations we investigated (all but prediction) generated representations that uniquely explained brain activity over and above the perceptual modalities. However only one, compression, uniquely statistically mediated the trait-brain relationship.
Computational operations of trait impression updating. The left column illustrates brain regions within which pattern similarity is uniquely associated with representations learned by neural networks trained to engage in the corresponding computational operation: compression, multimodal fusion, temporal integration, or prediction. The right column illustrates where these effects uniquely statistically mediate the association between brain activity and trait ratings. All results control for the raw annotations of face, voice quality, and speech semantics. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Unsurprisingly, all three perceptual modalities we investigated explained unique brain activity. However two modalities - face and semantics - went beyond that to unique statistically mediate the relationship between trait ratings and brain activity.
Modalities of trait impression updating. The left column illustrates brain regions within which pattern similarity is uniquely associated with annotations of the target person’s face, voice quality, or speech semantics, controlling for the other modalities. The right column illustrates where these effects uniquely statistically mediate the association between brain activity and trait ratings. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Consistent with other recent investigations of trait representations/updating that have used naturalistic stimuli, we found activity correlated with traits throughout much of the brain, but particularly concentrated in the superior temporal sulcus.
Brain regions within which pattern similarity is correlated with rated trait similarity of target people as participants watch SEND videos. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
To this end, we performed two forms of representational similarity analysis (RSA): spatiotemporal cross-stimulus (ST-RSA) to model the continuous features, and intersubject (IS-RSA) to model the individual differences.
 Analysis schematic. A) Spatiotemporal representational similarity analysis was used to relate patterns of brain activity over the course of SEND videos to i) continuous ratings of the traits of the individuals in those videos, ii) multimodal annotations (face, voice, and speech semantics), and iii) representations learned by neural networks to support computational operations (compression, multimodal fusion, temporal integration, and prediction). B) Intersubject representational similarity analysis was used to relate intersubject correlations in brain activity to individual differences in trait impression updating, demographics, social group attitudes, mood, and personality.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Building on our earlier behavioral work (osf.io/preprints/ps...), we used short videos of people narrating real life events to camera (from the SEND: github.com/StanfordSoci...) to elicit brain activity from scanner participants, and continuous trait ratings from online participants.
Schematics of scanner and online experimental designs. A) Scanner participants first completed individual difference surveys regarding their demographics, attitudes towards social groups, mood, and personality. In the MRI scanner, they then watched short autobiographical narrative videos. After the scan, they made ratings about the traits of the individuals in the videos they viewed. B) Online participants first made ratings about the traits of the individuals in the videos based on still frame images. They then made continuous ratings of the traits of these individuals over the course of the videos.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Excited to share this new preprint from @lindseytepfer.bsky.social, @chujunlin.bsky.social, and me, in which we investigate the different ways our brains allow us to change our minds about people! "The neurocomputational mechanisms of naturalistic trait impression updating" osf.io/preprints/ps...
Schematics of scanner and online experimental designs. A) Scanner participants first completed individual difference surveys regarding their demographics, attitudes towards social groups, mood, and personality. In the MRI scanner, they then watched short autobiographical narrative videos. After the scan, they made ratings about the traits of the individuals in the videos they viewed. B) Online participants first made ratings about the traits of the individuals in the videos based on still frame images. They then made continuous ratings of the traits of these individuals over the course of the videos.Analysis schematic. A) Spatiotemporal representational similarity analysis was used to relate patterns of brain activity over the course of SEND videos to i) continuous ratings of the traits of the individuals in those videos, ii) multimodal annotations (face, voice, and speech semantics), and iii) representations learned by neural networks to support computational operations (compression, multimodal fusion, temporal integration, and prediction). B) Intersubject representational similarity analysis was used to relate intersubject correlations in brain activity to individual differences in trait impression updating, demographics, social group attitudes, mood, and personality. Computational operations of trait impression updating. The left column illustrates brain regions within which pattern similarity is uniquely associated with representations learned by neural networks trained to engage in the corresponding computational operation: compression, multimodal fusion, temporal integration, or prediction. The right column illustrates where these effects uniquely statistically mediate the association between brain activity and trait ratings. All results control for the raw annotations of face, voice quality, and speech semantics. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.Individual differences in trait impression updating. IS-RSA results reflecting where individual differences were associated with ISC while watching SEND videos. A) Reflects where idiosyncratic trait impression updating was correlated with ISC. B) Likewise illustrates where four categories of potentially explanatory individual differences – social group attitudes, participant demographics, participant personality (Big 5), and participant mood (PANAS) predict ISC during SEND video viewing. C) Shows where social group attitudes statistically mediate the association between idiosyncratic trait impressions and ISC. Results are significant (p < .05) corrected for multiple comparisons across parcels via maximal statistic permutation testing.
24914
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Using simulations based around these mechanisms, we are able to recover the structure of motion quantity synchrony. Among friends, turn-taking is enough to achieve this, but among strangers, we must combine mutliple mechanisms to explain the pattern of synchrony we observe.
Simulation motion quantity synchrony. Artificial motion quantity time series for pairs of interacting friends (A) and strangers (B) were generated by bootstrapping actual turn lengths and gap lengths and adding turn onset and offset related motion (Figure 6). While turn-taking related motion was enough to accurately approximate friends’ synchrony, it was not enough to capture strangers’ synchrony. Two other mechanisms – station-keeping and conservation of motion – were added to the simulation, resulting in a better fit to strangers’ synchrony (C).
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Finally, station-keeping - a term borrowed from how ships, planes, and satellites are navigated - reflects keeping constant distance and orientation with repect to another body. In this case, we observe that people - particularly strangers - move to maintain proxemic distance and eye line.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Entrainment reflects the fact that the interactional context provides scripts, schemas, and conventions for navigating the social situation, which can themselves introduce synchrony even different conversations with different people. We examine handshakes as a clear example of such a convention.
Pseudo-synchrony and its entrainment mechanism. A) Both strangers and friends manifest significant pseudo-synchrony – correlations in motion quantity between non-interaction individuals. The effect is larger for strangers. B) A clear quadratic trend in motion quantity emerges over the course of 10-minute conversations. On top of this, there is a spike in movement during the first ~5 seconds of the conversation. C) Pseudo-synchrony is above average among strangers who shook hands, and below average among strangers who did not, with a significant difference between the two, and D) entrainment to this handshaking convention appears to explain the initial spike in movement across conversation.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Conservation of motion - which occurs only among strangers - reflects the fact that the overall amount of motion across the dyad within a given temporal window tends to stay lower than would be expected by chance.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Turn-taking is one critical mechanism: both speaker and listener's body motion spikes around the times of turn onsets an offsets. However, these spikes are larger - and precede the turn hand-off more - among strangers than among friends.
Patterns of motion quantity associated with speech turn onset (A) and offset (B) among friends and strangers. Statistically significant increases in body motion were observed following motion onset among both friends (blue) and strangers (orange). Among strangers, there was also a significant decrease in motion prior to turn onset. Among friends, motion increased at turn offset as well, but among strangers, this increase in motion occurred prior to turn offset. Significant differences in motion quantity between friends and strangers (green) were observed both before and after both turn onset and turn offset.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Why do these forms of synchrony arise? We examined four candidate mechanisms - illustrated schematically below - through a combination of simulations and testing auxiliary hypotheses.
A) Turn-taking, which causes increases in motion around the time of speaker role exchanges, as participants gesture to hand over or take over the floor. B) Conservation of motion in which one participant moves less when the other moves more, holding the total motion quantity relatively constant over time (note that the total amount of motion across the dyad is similar in the two panels, because one person reduces their motion to balance out the increase in the other’s motion). C) Entrainment, in which mutual following of the same conversational script leads to synchronized movement among people who are not directly interacting (i.e. pseudo-synchrony). Greeting gestures such as the handshakes depicted are one acute manifestation of this entrainment. D) Station-keeping, which maintains proxemic distance and eye level between members of the dyad. This mechanism accounts for directional synchrony, particularly between strangers who feel uncomfortable within each other’s personal space.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Finally, directional synchrony reflects people moving in the same (or opposite) directions along the same axis at the same (or lagged) point in time. We observed robust and complex patterns of direcitonal synchrony among strangers, but very little among friends.
Directional synchrony among friends and strangers. A) Among friends, we observed statistically significant directional synchrony in only two body parts (nose and eye) and only in the vertical axis. B) Among strangers, we observed statistically significant directional synchrony in a large number of body parts in the horizontal, vertical, and depth axes.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Pseudo-synchrony reflects both longterm (quadratic) trends in motion quantity over the entire conversation, and short spikes at the beginning of conversations. It is greater for strangers versus friend dyads.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
All three of these form of synchrony differ in degree, and often in kind, between friends and strangers. Friends display a strong, simple pattern of high motion quantity synchrony at short time lags. Strangers show some of this too, but also a major anti-synchrony that unfolds over a longer time.
Motion quantity synchrony among friends and strangers. A) Friends displayed significant positive synchrony in total motion quantity at short time lags (< 2.5 s) and B) this effect generalized across the majority of body part pairs (each line represents one pair). For example, one series of points might represent the synchrony between the amount of motion in one participant’s left hand and the other’s right foot. C) Strangers displayed significant positive synchrony in total motion quantity at short time lags (< 1 s) and significant negative total motion quantity synchrony at longer time lags (2.5 – 16.6 s). D) Again, this effect generalized to most body part pairs.
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
The three forms of synchrony illustrated below. Motion quantity reflections correlations in amount of motion; pseudo-synchrony reflects correlations between people who are not actually interacting; and directional synchrony reflects correlations in motion direction along a given spatial axis.
Forms of body motion synchrony. A) Motion quantity synchrony – synchrony in the amount of motion (orange) people engage in over time. This form of synchrony is agnostic to the direction of this movement, may be positive or negative, occurs at varying time lags, and is not specific to matched body parts across members of the dyad. B) Pseudo-synchrony – motion quantity synchrony between people who are not actually interacting. That is, members of different conversations engaging in similar amounts of motion at similar points in the conversation relative to its initiation. And C) directional synchrony – people moving the same body parts in the same direction (or along the same axis in the opposite direction) at the same time (or at some specific time lag).
110
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/08/2026
Very excited to share this preprint from me, @emmatempleton.bsky.social, @lindseytepfer.bsky.social & @thaliawheatley.bsky.social! "Friends and strangers engage in distinct regimes of body motion synchrony during conversation" osf.io/preprints/ps...
 Forms of body motion synchrony. A) Motion quantity synchrony – synchrony in the amount of motion (orange) people engage in over time. This form of synchrony is agnostic to the direction of this movement, may be positive or negative, occurs at varying time lags, and is not specific to matched body parts across members of the dyad. B) Pseudo-synchrony – motion quantity synchrony between people who are not actually interacting. That is, members of different conversations engaging in similar amounts of motion at similar points in the conversation relative to its initiation. And C) directional synchrony – people moving the same body parts in the same direction (or along the same axis in the opposite direction) at the same time (or at some specific time lag). Mechanisms of synchrony. A) Turn-taking, which causes increases in motion around the time of speaker role exchanges, as participants gesture to hand over or take over the floor. B) Conservation of motion in which one participant moves less when the other moves more, holding the total motion quantity relatively constant over time (note that the total amount of motion across the dyad is similar in the two panels, because one person reduces their motion to balance out the increase in the other’s motion). C) Entrainment, in which mutual following of the same conversational script leads to synchronized movement among people who are not directly interacting (i.e. pseudo-synchrony). Greeting gestures such as the handshakes depicted are one acute manifestation of this entrainment. D) Station-keeping, which maintains proxemic distance and eye level between members of the dyad. This mechanism accounts for directional synchrony, particularly between strangers who feel uncomfortable within each other’s personal space.Motion quantity synchrony among friends and strangers. A) Friends displayed significant positive synchrony in total motion quantity at short time lags (< 2.5 s) and B) this effect generalized across the majority of body part pairs (each line represents one pair). For example, one series of points might represent the synchrony between the amount of motion in one participant’s left hand and the other’s right foot. C) Strangers displayed significant positive synchrony in total motion quantity at short time lags (< 1 s) and significant negative total motion quantity synchrony at longer time lags (2.5 – 16.6 s). D) Again, this effect generalized to most body part pairs.Directional synchrony among friends and strangers. A) Among friends, we observed statistically significant directional synchrony in only two body parts (nose and eye) and only in the vertical axis. B) Among strangers, we observed statistically significant directional synchrony in a large number of body parts in the horizontal, vertical, and depth axes.
29736
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 15/07/2026
As a surprise parting gift to Lindsey, we ended her thesis DEFENSE in a very literal way: by giving her a chance to exercise her muay thai skills and live out a dream many PhD students have had at least once or twice - giving their advisor a punch to the gut!
0270
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 15/07/2026
Incredibly proud of my first PhD student @lindseytepfer.bsky.social for defending her dissertation yesterday! Lindsey was a founding member of SCRAP Lab, and her presence will always be felt here. We'll miss her greatly, but we're excited for her future endeavours, starting soon with @inquirer.com!
Me & Lindsey
0211
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 11/07/2026
This is the style-related part of my own prompt, in case it's useful for you or anyone reading. Not sure it's optimal in any sense, but I prefer the outputs with it vs. without.
Prioritize correctness, specificity, and depth over brevity when the topic is complex; concise direct answers for factual questions. Avoid generic "best practice" advice unless contextualized and justified mechanistically. Prefer structured reasoning, explicit comparisons, and concrete examples over vague summaries. Assume interest in mechanistic understanding, not just operational instructions. Optimize for intellectual usefulness rather than conversational friendliness. No patronizing reassurance, excessive enthusiasm, or therapy-style language. Avoid filler phrases: "great question," "it depends" without elaboration, "here's the thing," motivational framing, or generic AI-assistant hedging.
040
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/07/2026
Now in press at Cortex! "False discovery rate correction promotes confounded neuroimaging designs" Paper 🔓: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Effect of confound mass on true positive rates under test-wise FDR correction in completely arbitrary data. Confound mass represents how large a confound is in terms of the product of the number of tests it is present in, and its mean effect size across these tests. Results are shown at differing combinations of true effect size, number of tests with true (i.e., non-confound) effects, and sample size. Inflated surface maps of meta-analytic z-statistics from Neurosynth for low-level confounds (top) and high-level cognitive tasks (bottom). Red reflects positive activations, blue reflects negative (de)activations, and darker colors indicate larger z-statistics. Maps are thresholded at |z| = 1 for visualization purposes.The difference in integrated true positive rate between parcel-wise FDR and parcel-wise FWER (y-axis) is plotted as a function of confound effect size. Each point represents 1 out of 5000 studies simulated for each combination of task and confound. Smoothed loess lines are used to better show the overall trends.Effect of FDR-based publication bias on observed confound effects sizes. Simulated meta-analytic confound effect sizes are visualized through violin plots for each combination of task effect and confound effect examined in the neural data simulations. Meta-analyses featuring publication bias (orange) substantially inflate these effect size estimates in all cases, relative to meta-analyses featuring no publication bias (blue). Moreover, this bias was present – and in most cases larger – in the subset of studies that were included in the meta-analysis specifically when the publication bias was based on FDR instead of FWER integrated true positive rates (green).
44620
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 28/06/2026
We're engaged! @tyanna.bsky.social
Two humans smiling, one holding up a ringed hand
7541
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 11/05/2026
For a while, folks have asked me about older psyc job market numbers, and how they might reflect the 2008 financial crisis. I've finally been able to put together some numbers to reflect that (below) though the raw estimates come with some important interpretational caveats 🧵👇
A bar chart reflecting the number of psychology jobs per year from 2007-2025 by area.
1103
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 05/05/2026
Where did this year's #psychjobs market end up? Thanks to an unusually high number late postings, not as bad as it was looking earlier in the year. Still, this is the smallest number of jobs posted since 2012, representing a 26% decline from last year (~2/3rds the size of the covid drop in 2020).
Bar graph showing tenure track psychology jobs posted each year since 2010 broken up by area.
15014
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 07/03/2026
My father, Roy James Thornton, died on Wednesday. He was a scientist and educator, a gardener, a lifelong sportsman, an avid fiction reader, and an incomparable father, son, and husband. My mother and I are heartbroken. Read about his life here: markallenthornton.com/personal/roy...
Dad with me as a babyMe, Mom, and Dad in KokomoMe and Dad grillingThe three of us in Costa Rica
10440
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 11/02/2026
New preprint from Lindsey Tepfer (@ltjaql.bsky.social) and me! We silenced portions of internal monologues in two films to manipulate participants' access to characters' thoughts. Using ISC and RSA, we found that this aligned later neural processing of the narrative & encoding of trait impressions.
Figure 1. Experimental stimuli and paradigm. 1A. Manipulation timeline. Each video features a total of 12 IM moments, half of which were silenced in version 1, and the other half silenced in version 2. This produces two versions of each video where only half of the IMs are audible to the participant. 1B. Voice removal. Background sounds were preserved in both versions, regardless of IM presence. 1C. fMRI paradigm. Participants were randomly assigned a version and watched both videos in a counter-balanced order. 1D. Afterwards, they made trait ratings on each video’s main character in random order before rating them on subsequent traits. Figure 2. Scanner and online participant trait rating results. A. Scanner participants arrive at similar conclusions about characters across versions by the end of each video. B. Trait ratings at the end of the videos are correlated between online and scanner participants. C. The IM manipulation had a significant effect on the trait ratings across the duration of the videos, such that different versions led to different trait impressions. D. Participants who saw different versions changed their ratings for both clip types but changed to a greater degree after seeing the IM segments relative to the NIM.  Figure 3. ISC results. Gaining access to the same mental state knowledge in earlier IM clips led to significantly (p < .05, corrected) more aligned neural activity in subsequent NIM clips across a wide swath of the temporal lobe, as well as the frontal pole and SPL. Figure 4. Representational similarity analysis results. 4A. RSA pipeline.  Clip-specific patterns of brain activity were correlated across movies within segment type (NIM or IM) to create a correlation distance matrix for each participant. Corresponding trait ratings were partitioned into components specific to each of the two versions of each film or shared across both versions. RDMs based on those traits were used to predict the neural RDMs. The resulting coefficients were sorted into matched (version), unmatched (version), and shared across version, and inference was performed via t-tests across participants. See methods section for further details of this analysis. 4B. Prior trait rating results. 1. While watching IM clips of the same version, the prior trait ratings predict activity in the bilateral A1, STS, STG, and right VLPFC. 2. Prior trait rating predicts activity in these regions again in the same-version NIM clips. 3. Across the two versions, while watching the NIM clips, the prior trait ratings predicted activity in the right occipitotemporal cortex. 4C. Trait updating results. 1. While watching NIM clips, the right STS & MTG predict version-matched trait updating. 2. In the unmatched NIM clips, STS & MTG again predict trait updating. 3. Across the two versions, the precuneus and LOC show pattern similarity for trait updating in participants.
25216
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 04/11/2025
Another ~monthly update on the state of the #psychjobs market: more jobs continue to trickle in, though at a decreasing pace. We've nearly hit parity with covid in absolute terms, although the prior year baseline was higher this year than that, so we still see a slightly larger relative decrease.
0246
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/10/2025
We're a month further into the job market - how are things looking? The good news is that the market does seem to have been delayed: ~150 new listings have appeared since my last post. The bad news is that the total is still substantially lower than what it was during the covid dip.
25121
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 05/09/2025
Today, SCRAP Lab returned (right) to the Path of Life Garden in Windsor, VT - the site of our first in-person get-together as a lab 5 years ago (left) - to welcome our newest member, graduate student @gabefajardo.bsky.social!
Original members of SCRAP LabCurrent members of SCRAP Lab
0164
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/09/2025
I tried to do something like that in my original blog post on the job market years ago (markallenthornton.com/blog/psychjo...), but I haven't updated that code to deal with the structure of the new wiki. Here's what it would look like in a "normal" year based on the old data:
030
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/09/2025
There will be more postings to come, no doubt. I don't have easy access to when each job was posted in previous years. However, historically most applications are due by mid October (see histogram below) which suggests that the majority of ads would normally have been posted by now.
170
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 03/09/2025
The psych job market may not be dead... but it is gravely injured 😬 So far it's looking like the Trump administration's attacks on higher ed/research are going to have more than 2x the impact on the job market as the covid-19 pandemic. #psychjobs #neurojobs #academicjobs
Bar plot showing the number of psychology jobs posted each year by area. There are major dips in 2020 due to covid, and in 2025 (now).
1416573
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 29/08/2025
After 5 years, I finally carved out time to turn this blog post on FDR (markallenthornton.com/blog/fdr-pro...) into a manuscript. The preprint features a much broader range of simulations showing how FDR promotes confounds, and how this effect compounds with publication bias: osf.io/preprints/ps...
Effect of confound mass on true positive rates under FDR correction. Confound mass represents how large a confound is in terms of the product of its voxel extent and effect size. Results are shown at differing combinations of true effect size, true effect voxel extent, and sample size.Inflated surface maps of meta-analytic z-statistics from Neurosynth for low-level confounds (top) and high-level cognitive tasks (bottom). Red reflects positive activations, blue reflects negative (de)activations, and darker colors indicate larger z-statistics. Maps are thresholded at |z| = 1 for visualization purposes. Effect of confound effect size on true positive rates for task effects under FDR correction. Colors indicate sample sizes: N = 25 in blue, N = 50 in green, and N = 100 in orange. Effect sizes are reflected by the darkness of each color, with light shades representing d = .2, medium d = .5, and dark d = .8. The task brain maps and confound brain maps referenced in each panel are shown in Figure 3.Effect of FDR-based publication bias on observed confound effects sizes. Simulated meta-analytic confound effect sizes are visualized through violin plots for each combination of task effect and confound effect examined in the neural data simulations. Meta-analyses featuring publication bias (orange) substantially inflate these effect size estimates in all cases, relative to meta-analyses featuring no publication bias (blue).
35015
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 24/08/2025
I haven't been doing much astrophotography for the last year or so because the deck I use for it had become unsafe. But it's repaired now, so I'm back at it! I think this is the best shot of Andromeda that I've managed to date!
Photo of Andromeda galaxy
1420913
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 13/08/2025
I've had a coffee plant as a house plant for the last few years, and it finally produced some ripe cherries. I peeled them, fermented the coating off the beans, roasted them, and did a taste test (vs. store bought). The homegrown won (less astringent)! Enjoyed w/ (also) homegrown aronia jam on toast
Coffee berriesRaw coffee beansRoasted beansStore bought (left) vs homegrown (right) coffee; toast with homegrown/made aronia jam
3290
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 07/08/2025
New paper from me at Cognition and Emotion! "Deep neural network models of emotion understanding" I discuss how deep nets can be used as cognitive models of emotion perception, prediction, and regulation: doi.org/10.1080/0269... (h/t @ltjaql.bsky.social for the illustrations!)
13310
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 29/07/2025
Oops! My categories got scrambled when I was merging data from the new and old wikis. Should have double-checked that. Here's the corrected version - sorry about that, folks!
030
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 28/07/2025
In advance of next year's (likely dire) job market, here are the 2024-2025 numbers from the psych job wiki: the overall number of tenure-track job listings in psychology and neuroscience fell slightly, from 860 to 822 (this doesn't include canceled searches, which are often not properly reported).
22818
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 26/04/2025
SCRAP Lab had a great time at #SANS2025! Can't wait till next year!
0385
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 24/04/2025
Wearing a lot of different hats (or rather, badges) at #SANS2025!
0242
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 13/03/2025
I believe the computational rigor, diversity of data and data collection methods, and broad coverage of this work make it well-suited to serve as a new foundation for research on relationships, and will allow us to integrate relationship concepts more closely into other facets of social cognition.
131
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 13/03/2025
New paper out at @naturehumbehav.bsky.social! This is the most comprehensive investigation ever conducted into how people think about relationships: a true tour de force! We identify 5 dimensions and 3 categories that organize relationship concepts. Proud to have made a (small) contribution to it!
a, Three behavioural tasks and their corresponding categories (via UMAP and k-means clustering). The dimensional survey indicated three high-order categories (hostile, private and public, abbreviated as HPP), whereas both cognitive tasks identified six canonical relationship types. b, Text analysis on categorical labels in the free sorting task revealed the label hierarchy: the hierarchical clustering algorithm first derived three HPP categories; next, the ‘public’ cluster was further split into ‘transactional’ and ‘power’, and the ‘private’ cluster was subdivided into ‘family’, ‘romantic’ and ‘affiliative’. The word clouds in the treemap display label names in each cluster. The radar plots illustrate the average scores on the FAVEE dimensions across relationships in each category. c, A dimension–category hybrid model was evaluated by applying k-means clustering to the 5D FAVEE embedding space. Three HPP clusters were found, suggesting that HPP could emerge from the FAVEE space. d, The three building blocks of the relationship concept system and their internal associations. The flow chart illustrates how people represent relationships via the joint framework of dimensions and categories. Five FAVEE dimensions can be understood as filters (for example, all relationships can be filtered into hostile and solidarity relationships via the valence dimension), and relationship categories are formed by uneven distributions projected on dimensions (see the details in Supplementary Fig. 14). Our data suggest that six canonical relationship types (in the grey circles) originate from three HPP categories (in the dashed circles), which inherently emerge from the 5D FAVEE space (arrows).a, Three representational geometries were derived from the full-feature model (all evaluative features), the dimensional model (FAVEE) and the categorical model (HPP). Using leave-one-region-out cross-validation, high similarities of representational geometries (all r > 0.687) were observed across 19 global regions (black areas on the world map), suggesting that FAVEE dimensions and HPP categories are commonly shared across the world. The box plots show the median (horizontal line) and the interquartile range (IQR) ± 1.5 × IQR. Here the full-feature model represents the noise ceiling of cross-region representational similarity. b, Computational modelling of representational geometries using RSA multiple regression. A set of ecological, biological and sociocultural RDMs were fit to predict the cross-regional relationship RDM, and religion and modernization level were the only two factors that could significantly predict the cross-regional variability of representational geometries. The asterisks indicate significant regression coefficients according to the Mantel test, and the dashed lines indicate noise ceilings (Methods). c, Significant correlations between cross-region pairwise dissimilarity of representational geometry and cross-region pairwise dissimilarity in religion and modernization level. The shaded area represents the 95% confidence interval. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; one-sided permutation tests.a, Pipeline for generating PLM embeddings. The query (dashed box) was formulated as ‘[DESC] The most salient feature of the relationship [TERM] is [MASK]’, where the [DESC] component was generated by GPT-4 and the [TERM] component was replaced with one of the 258 relationships. The [MASK] component was filled by the PLM with words that are most likely to occur there, given the context. The last layer vector was extracted on the position of [MASK] for each of 258 relationships, resulting in a 258 × 768 matrix. The resemblance of human representations and PLM representations (pretrained on a modern Chinese corpus) was 0.553. b, PCA on modern PLM embeddings. By correlating human ratings on 33 dimensional features with the first seven principal components of PLM embeddings, we found that PLM representations had captured corresponding features of FAVEE structures. c, Correspondence between PCA on human ratings and PCA on modern PLM embeddings (in purple) and ancient PLM embeddings (in green). d, Generalizability of the FAVEE-HPP model in ancient and modern times. RSA correlation on RDMs suggested that the FAVEE dimensions and HPP categories can significantly predict relationship representations in historical and modern times. The box plots indicate RSA correlation distributions at chance level by permutation, and the dashed lines indicate noise ceilings. e, Model comparison analysis suggested that the FAVEE model outperformed 15 other existing theories in predicting ancient and modern PLM embeddings. Broadly, FAVEE was significantly better than any random combination of theoretical features, Ancient–modern differences. Using linear combinations of the five FAVEE components as regressors to predict ancient and modern PLM embeddings, we found substantial changes on ‘formality’ and ‘equality’ for their explained variance in ancient and modern PLM representations, suggesting that these two dimensions may contribute differently to relationship conceptualization across time.PCA loadings on 30 theoretical features derived from multidisciplinary literature. Dark colours on the colour bar represent larger values, with blue indicating negative values and red indicating positive values. b, 159 relationships were plotted in the 5D space on the basis of their scores on each dimension. PCA loadings and relationship scores jointly suggested that RC1 corresponded to formality (formal versus informal), RC2 to activeness (close versus distant), RC3 to valence (harmony versus conflict), RC4 to exchange (concrete versus symbolic) and RC5 to equality (unequal versus equal). Each axis is labelled with the variance explained for the corresponding dimension.
1407
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 06/12/2024
Finally, we digitally altered faces to experimentally manipulate the traits associated with them, and showed that this produced targeted, specific effects on situated attributions of individual mental states. This effect generalized (with some variability) across participants from five continents!
Figure showing causal effects of manipulating face-traits on attributed mental states in situations.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 06/12/2024
We also found that trait impressions of faces alter the representational spaces of the corresponding targets' mental states.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 06/12/2024
These data allowed us to perform a variance-partitioning analysis, in which we found that (situation-agnostic) trait attributions, but not (situation-agnostic) mental state judgements) of faces accounted for unique variance in situated mental state judgements.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 06/12/2024
Assisted by neural network language- and face-embedding models, we systematically sampled a diverse array of mental state terms, personality trait terms, and images of faces.
Stimulus sampling diagram.Figure showing stimulus representativity.
100
Mark Thornton @markthornton.bsky.social · 17/11/2024
My own attestation for this starter pack 😊
Daffodil flower from my garden with white petals and an orange center. Water droplets cling to the flower. Macro photo against a black background.Harvest of peaches in a hod, shown against grass.Me comparing the size of my head (unfavorably) to the size of a sunflower head I grew.Colander containing strawberries, blueberries, gumi, and chamomile, shown against a fire pit I constructed in my garden, surrounded by yarrow I grew from seed.
3161