ライフサイエンスコーパス: individual difference

1 rest between members (due to various between-individual differences).

2 er families might also provide insights into individual differences.

3 ggests that these are more likely to produce individual differences.

4 ions may benefit by taking into account such individual differences.

5 ith extreme granularity and reliably reveals individual differences.

6 nd emotion involve diverse developmental and individual differences.

7 and cognitive functions, and allow for inter-individual differences.

8 e neurobiological systems contribute to such individual differences.

9 e on the neural underpinnings of these large individual differences.

10 ontrol of SCN activity exhibits wide ranging individual differences.

11 ses of social hierarchy perception and their individual differences.

12 s that either include, or ignore, unmeasured individual differences.

13 the reprogramming process erases many inter-individual differences.

14 reliability confirmed the presence of stable individual differences.

15 heir effects on subjective awareness, and in individual differences.

16 riments reveal how stimulus properties [13], individual differences [14], and contextual factors [15]

17 on ILY, MsgA, and NanA, although there were individual differences among the plasma samples.

18 the additional statistical power to perform individual differences analyses to tease apart potential

19 We show that these individual differences and potential lighting interpreta

20 baby signals among parents vary according to individual differences and show plasticity over time.

21 ent human skin cells, the magnitude of inter-individual differences and the potential influence of ag

22 tterns from sample replicates while allowing individual differences, and (2) modeling the uncertainty

23 With the individual difference approach, we found that participan

24 features of a scene are fixated [6-8], large individual differences are also present, especially in d

25 ooked at aging, as one specific dimension of individual differences, as well as when we looked at gen

26 However, individual differences at the cellular level likely lead

27 ishment or neutral outcomes and investigated individual differences based on avoidance performance.

28 Despite the individual differences between animals, the kinetics of

29 While exhibiting consistent individual differences, birds also showed flexibility in

30 performance of groups can emerge from inter-individual differences by high-resolution tracking of kn

31 Our findings reveal how individual differences can affect decision-making under

32 -level impulsivity exists on a continuum and individual differences can be adaptive in different cont

33 l temporal areas as key neural loci in which individual differences differentially affect value-based

34 ll as the relationship of these regions with individual difference (e.g., impulsivity) and treatment

35 Furthermore, our method is able to detect individual differences from a single tissue sample, i.e.

36 general factors of intelligence exist among individual differences (g) in performance in several spe

37 ortant decision heuristic and what underlies individual differences have hitherto remained unanswered

38 Similarly, unmeasured individual differences have the potential to impact pred

39 al environmental variation, while unmeasured individual differences impacted parameters describing po

40 We demonstrate that individual differences in a neurobiological measure of p

41 redictability during childhood gives rise to individual differences in a range of social psychologica

42 ted with increased negativity, we tested how individual differences in acute stress responses influen

43 We have developed a PHS for quantifying individual differences in age-specific genetic risk for

44 habituation is a more reliable biomarker of individual differences in amygdala function.

45 Individual differences in AQ were inversely correlated w

46 owerful analytic framework for understanding individual differences in attentional functions.

47 meaningful pupil metrics that correlate with individual differences in autism traits, as measured by

48 who experienced prior institutionalization, individual differences in aversive learning were associa

49 and structural neural components underlying individual differences in avoidance learning, which may

50 Individual differences in baseline resting-state connect

51 These individual differences in BCR levels and signaling might

52 The ubiquity of consistent inter-individual differences in behavior ("animal personalitie

53 in-based pathways that give rise to the vast individual differences in behavior as well as risk for p

54 lity of frontal polar volume correlated with individual differences in behavior, indicating the regio

55 alters the association between brain FCD and individual differences in behavioral performance.

56 ed to brain maturation in old age as well as individual differences in behavioral performance.

57 However, large individual differences in behavioral responses to stimul

58 ironment (context dependence) can select for individual differences in behaviour (i.e., personality)

59 st that sexual selection is likely to favour individual differences in behaviour, social plasticity (

60 The individual differences in behavioural responses to atomo

61 Our model can accurately predict individual differences in brain activity and highlights

62 resting) uncovers only part of the relevant individual differences in brain function, and that the s

63 hod from dynamic network theory, to quantify individual differences in brain functional dynamics.

64 Individual differences in brain functional networks may

65 d the variability across subjects, including individual differences in brain lateralization.

66 We propose that individual differences in brain responses are, to a larg

67 Our goal was to determine whether individual differences in brain structure predict the ex

68 of central activity and may be dependent on individual differences in central processing.

69 e identified genetic factors contributing to individual differences in childhood viral respiratory il

70 ment eating times may be misleading owing to individual differences in circadian timing relative to c

71 an hierarchical models were used to quantify individual differences in CMV and EBV DNA replication.

72 d neither dopamine release or uptake tracked individual differences in cocaine consumption or the rei

73 aine, the dopaminergic variations underlying individual differences in cocaine self-administration be

74 interest in the potential adaptive value of individual differences in cognition, few studies have at

75 Evidence of powerful individual differences in cognitive aging has sharpened

76 t distinguishable neural mechanisms underlie individual differences in cognitive control during diffe

77 In particular, individual differences in cognitive empathy were associa

78 se findings may be relevant to understanding individual differences in cognitive fatigability and dev

79 se findings may be relevant to understanding individual differences in cognitive fatigue and developi

80 ral flexibility of the SN uniquely predicted individual differences in cognitive flexibility.

81 used, for example, to draw inferences about individual differences in cognitive function, or differe

82 Studies have shown individual differences in components of this trade-off b

83 sed cluster analysis to identify patterns of individual differences in compulsive "addiction-like" ag

84 hip between serum concentrations of FGF2 and individual differences in conditioned fear expression in

85 ), we provide evidence for relatively stable individual differences in consolation behaviour.

86 ntial adaptive value of this ability, robust individual differences in conspecific face recognition e

87 Individual differences in contact rate can arise from ho

88 mole rats, Fukomys damarensis) suggest that individual differences in cooperative behavior are the r

89 This study is the first to examine individual differences in cortical connections and sugge

90 es in cortical connections and suggests that individual differences in cortical connections may be re

91 Stress exposure is associated with individual differences in corticolimbic structure and fu

92 Some individual differences in CTA expression among rats with

93 We first show that individual differences in DA release arise from differen

94 the molecular clockwork may influence inter-individual differences in decision-making behavior.

95 It also reveals an important contribution of individual differences in determining how adaptation is

96 erstanding the cognitive and neural bases of individual differences in developmental risk and resilie

97 ychological and physical health, can predict individual differences in dietary self-control in humans

98 iency was found to increase as a function of individual differences in divergent thinking ability.

99 cess methamphetamine self-administration and individual differences in drug taking defined animals wi

100 regions were also distinctly correlated with individual differences in each type of memory-guided att

101 We have previously shown that individual differences in educational achievement are hi

102 avior in adults has recently been related to individual differences in emotional responsiveness to fe

103 ucidate the neuroanatomical underpinnings of individual differences in empathy.

104 olymorphisms that were associated with inter-individual differences in expression at each day and fou

105 This is in striking contrast to individual differences in face identity recognition, whi

106 ." Here, we investigate the origins of these individual differences in face preferences using a twin

107 research has tested the relationship between individual differences in face recognition and endogenou

108 ulate emotion perception when accounting for individual differences in factors such as baseline task

109 y in the right auditory cortex is related to individual differences in FFR-fundamental frequency (f0)

110 ing decisions, few studies have investigated individual differences in fine-scale daily foraging patt

111 Furthermore, individual differences in flexibility of local efficienc

112 ssociation between striatum connectivity and individual differences in food craving and changes in bo

113 Studying individual differences in functional connectivity across

114 These results show that individual differences in functional connectivity consis

115 To help understand individual differences in functional outcomes following

116 connectivity, which in turn correlated with individual differences in generalization.

117 ing CRCs has been associated with both inter-individual differences in genomic architecture and envir

118 construction processes might partly mediate individual differences in geometric illusory perception.

119 t it is difficult to achieve due to the high individual differences in glycemic response to nutrition

120 ittle is known about the brain predictors of individual differences in growth trajectories of numeric

121 Individual differences in habenula volume were negativel

122 cterized rat model that displays substantial individual differences in hippocampal memory during agin

123 uenced by viral virulence factors as well as individual differences in host response.

124 First, it shows that individual differences in how humans direct their attent

125 rosocial and antisocial behaviors arise from individual differences in how we represent the value of

126 coding polymorphisms in OXTR might influence individual differences in human social cognition and beh

127 most comprehensive analysis of the causes of individual differences in human traits thus far and will

128 sed concept for studying G as it pertains to individual differences in humans and other species.

129 Research into the neural correlates of individual differences in imagery vividness point to an

130 found that the latter process contributed to individual differences in implicit bias.

131 Individual differences in impulsivity and early adversit

132 ed the neural activity associated with these individual differences in incentive salience.

133 riation in the CADM2 gene is associated with individual differences in information processing speed.

134 associated with a human social pathology and individual differences in insect social behavior, thus p

135 Although individual differences in intelligence (general cognitiv

136 the HLA region did not significantly predict individual differences in intelligence in an independent

137 Instead, individual differences in intelligence may reflect varia

138 Here, we examined the relationship between individual differences in intrinsic corticospinal excita

139 We investigated whether individual differences in intrinsic functional connectiv

140 ion training course, we investigated whether individual differences in intrinsic resting-state functi

141 2-4 s after sample onset, were modulated by individual differences in load-related changes in the va

142 Rather than explaining individual differences in long-term mating success, we i

143 cture and function may partially account for individual differences in memory.

144 ld be carefully considered in the context of individual differences in metabolic pathways.

145 Individual differences in modularity were correlated wit

146 xhibit spatiotemporal coherence, covary with individual differences in mood and personality traits, a

147 ry evidence for the neuroanatomical basis of individual differences in moral judgments.

148 Individual differences in movement and space-use, fundam

149 he study in late childhood (ages 7-12), when individual differences in narcissism first emerge.

150 Our results suggest that individual differences in nesting preferences are the ma

151 It has been hypothesized that individual differences in network connectivity impact th

152 fer across individuals, we hypothesized that individual differences in network connectivity would rel

153 We sought to map these two pathways onto individual differences in neural reward and threat proce

154 s, but few studies have investigated whether individual differences in neuroanatomy can also explain

155 xperimental designs, has documented striking individual differences in neurobiological sensitivities

156 Finally, research investigating individual differences in neurotransmitter receptor geno

157 Individual differences in newborn visual attention signi

158 hildhood can be predicted even earlier, from individual differences in newborns' average duration of

159 over, the functional correlates of normative individual differences in older-adult value-based decisi

160 and show how personality could contribute to individual differences in our predisposition to approach

161 Animal models have revealed that individual differences in Oxtr expression in the brain d

162 onstrate that genetic variants contribute to individual differences in Oxtr expression, but only in p

163 ion by the inferior frontal gyrus, predicted individual differences in participants' stopping perform

164 iating emotion regulatory brain activity and individual differences in patient response might be expl

165 e purpose of this study was to determine how individual differences in Pavlovian approach responses a

166 sk-positive neural components predicts inter-individual differences in performance in each task acros

167 Individual differences in performance were related to th

168 during a sustained attention task predicted individual differences in performance.

169 l signature, which is, however, qualified by individual differences in personality and attachment sty

170 Individual differences in personality and attachment sty

171 ore generally, we provide an explanation how individual differences in personality traits might be re

172 th neural endophenotypes may broadly explain individual differences in phenotype including susceptibi

173 be particularly important to understand how individual differences in plasticity mechanisms at a cel

174 understanding of genetic pathways underlying individual differences in positive affect is still limit

175 Consistent individual differences in prey behaviour, especially in

176 In this commentary we focus on individual differences in proposed mechanisms underlying

177 tanding how human cortical networks underpin individual differences in psychological functions.

178 Understanding individual differences in PTSD vulnerability will allow

179 ese results provide a unique animal model of individual differences in PTSD-like behavior, allowing t

180 ligand [(11)C]-(+)-PHNO was used to quantify individual differences in putative D3 receptor availabil

181 sured using arterial sampling to correct for individual differences in radioligand metabolism.

182 has been proposed as a mechanism to explain individual differences in rates of cognitive decline, bu

183 ience-sampling task with fMRI to examine how individual differences in real-world emotion, experience

184 Individual differences in response to social stress and

185 variation in the human genome is a cause of individual differences in responses to medications and i

186 However, these individual differences in responsivity may result from a

187 Individual differences in reward representations may con

188 ging literature supporting the importance of individual differences in reward-related brain function

189 These findings suggest that individual differences in risk-preference, as well as re

190 mass and age both capture a large amount of individual differences in roe deer.

191 romedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) predicted individual differences in satiety-related choice behavio

192 trategy formation to execution and reflected individual differences in saving behavior.

193 Individual differences in sensitivity to choice correlat

194 There are individual differences in sensitivity to reward-paired c

195 In contrast, individual differences in sgACC volume were associated w

196 tional architecture should therefore explain individual differences in size judgments.

197 n the biological mechanisms that shape inter-individual differences in social conduct.

198 unt for variations in fitness in relation to individual differences in social integration.

199 Individual differences in social interest have wide-rang

200 peration also occur within groups; and inter-individual differences in sociality have reported fitnes

201 ietal cortex predicted both inter- and intra-individual differences in socially-induced change in gri

202 ese shifts in SMR, in turn, were linked with individual differences in somatic growth; those individu

203 ative disorders, or in objectively measuring individual differences in speech reception solely by lis

204 teners with normal hearing show considerable individual differences in speech understanding when comp

205 ferior frontal gyrus and STN, also predicted individual differences in stopping efficiency.

206 ransporter gene (SLC6A4) are associated with individual differences in stress reactivity, vulnerabili

207 We show that individual differences in stress-induced increases in IL

208 ilize laboratory mice and their innate inter-individual differences in stress-susceptibility to demon

209 These results provide evidence that individual differences in striatal functional connectivi

210 s depend on the object being imagined and on individual differences in style and reported vividness o

211 ative, but not sensorimotor, inputs predicts individual differences in subsequent skill learning.

212 ons shape the neural architecture underlying individual differences in susceptibility and resilience

213 model that (at least in part) explains inter-individual differences in susceptibility to a drug-induc

214 ns across normative older adults may reflect individual differences in susceptibility to age-related

215 D), recent studies have shown that there are individual differences in susceptibility to age-related

216 FSHD1 and FSHD2 individuals is dependent on individual differences in susceptibility to D4Z4 hypomet

217 s highlight novel markers that prognosticate individual differences in susceptibility to propofol and

218 Inter-individual differences in susceptibility to the toxic ef

219 the current understanding of the origins of individual differences in sustained attention, providing

220 we show that one source of this variance are individual differences in the ability to focus selective

221 impact on tract organization that underlies individual differences in the acquisition and retrieval

222 We also found meaningful individual differences in the activation of this region:

223 umans and stress the importance of potential individual differences in the activity of specific recep

224 Our large dataset also revealed that individual differences in the amount of information gath

225 It is vital that we better understand individual differences in the brain ageing process; henc

226 Using functional MRI, we show that individual differences in the categorization of face mor

227 Two-year change and individual differences in the change of regional volumes

228 r understanding the neurobiological basis of individual differences in the cognitive and behavioral e

229 ioral abnormalities could reflect pre-morbid individual differences in the cognitive domain of intere

230 Our model is based on individual differences in the costs and/or benefits of b

231 Individual differences in the degree of change in functi

232 h the properties of the words being read and individual differences in the degree to which participan

233 Of interest, there are substantial inter-individual differences in the degree to which these phys

234 tions among these regions also contribute to individual differences in the depression-related appetit

235 ovide fundamental clues about the sources of individual differences in the disposition to distrust, i

236 ding how they may differ from the sources of individual differences in the disposition to trust.

237 identify any significant between- and within-individual differences in the dynamics of activation.

238 uggest that SSRIs have the capacity to alter individual differences in the ERN, providing evidence th

239 for different types of moral judgments, and individual differences in the extent to which this netwo

240 rovided the technical tools to examine inter-individual differences in the function of placebo-respon

241 arding in rodents and might also account for individual differences in the hedonic effects of cannabi

242 Interestingly, individual differences in the HEP modulation by arousal

243 face area (FFA) was closely associated with individual differences in the identity discrimination pe

244 relevant data supporting the hypothesis that individual differences in the intensity of the post-AMI

245 Here, we focus on (ii) and determine whether individual differences in the neural representation of t

246 s the tendency to help others and relates to individual differences in the neuroanatomy of these area

247 in which there are known to be considerable individual differences in the normal population.

248 Humans show individual differences in the number of crossovers gener

249 to varying cognitive demands reflects stable individual differences in the personality trait epistemi

250 We elaborate on the role of individual differences in the processing mechanisms outl

251 er epigenetic regulation might explain inter-individual differences in the progression of specific su

252 have begun to define etiological factors and individual differences in the propensity to become addic

253 we examined the factors that influenced the individual differences in the response to atomoxetine: t

254 s a gap in understanding the neural bases of individual differences in the responses to environmental

255 isorder, little is known about the source of individual differences in the sensitivity for the stress

256 We also found that individual differences in the structure of the angular g

257 These results demonstrate that individual differences in the tendency to seek stimulati

258 Some inter-individual differences in the threshold values between p

259 in left auditory cortex that is sensitive to individual differences in the timing of initial response

260 There are significant individual differences in the use of AG sounds by chimpa

261 degree of this neural interaction related to individual differences in the use of WM to guide behavio

262 Objectively quantifying individual differences in threat response would be a val

263 development of models capable of predicting individual differences in traits and behavior using brai

264 This may have implications for individual differences in treatment efficacy for approac

265 This is the first report showing how individual differences in two enterotypes cause distinct

266 We tested the hypothesis that individual differences in vocabulary knowledge are influ

267 tive studies as distinct foci of research on individual differences in vulnerability to PTSD after su

268 Understanding individual differences in vulnerability to THC SA may le

269 These results demonstrate that individual differences in vWM capacity are associated wi

270 ma-aminobutryic acid (GABA) content predicts individual differences in WM task performance using a no

271 We define individuals' differences in chronological and predicted

272 gence of collective behavior from consistent individual differences, including variation in the struc

273 Language network activity showed fewer individual differences, indicative of closer input track

274 can be used to understand that corresponding individual differences lack any evidence.

275 explain and to predict how consistent inter-individual differences may drive collective behavior.

276 Pupil dilation metrics correlate with individual differences measured by the Social Responsive

277 elated but had unique relations with several individual difference measures and independent effects o

278 rs with normal hearing thresholds that links individual differences observed in behavior and auditory

279 ariable but strongly correlated to the inter-individual differences observed in vivo.

280 y (ITV) in brain regions coding PPS predicts individual differences of its boundary at the behavioral

281 als explained unique portions of variance in individual differences of VWM capacity and showed differ

282 These effects of consistent individual differences on group-level states emerged nat

283 g the relative small influence of unmeasured individual differences on population dynamics in roe dee

284 on (TMS) to explore the impact of pre-morbid individual differences on post-lesion performance.

285 suggesting that associations reflect stable individual differences or chronic life circumstances.

286 ent study offers compelling evidence that an individual difference present from birth predicts a func

287 tes change across human development or about individual differences related to early environmental ex

288 vioral benefit from atomoxetine, analyses of individual differences revealed that enhanced response i

289 ess is much more complicated than studies of individual differences seemed to suggest.

290 tegies observed among species and argue that individual differences should be accounted for in demogr

291 A key question in collective behavior is how individual differences structure animal groups, affect t

292 ve environment) but is dependent on baseline individual differences such as gender, personality trait

293 nce in the multi-omics is dominated by inter-individual differences, temporal patterns are evident in

294 bilistic reward learning is characterised by individual differences that become acute in aging.

295 ate release, as a stress-sensitive marker of individual differences to stress-induced mood disorders.

296 of risk-preference in rats, in which stable individual differences, trial-by-trial choices, and resp

297 , more so for music, but there were distinct individual differences, which were highly correlated for

298 cognitive deficits, although there are large individual differences, with marked vulnerability or res

299 cies (G), the second that concerns observing individual differences within a nonhuman species (g).

300 Our results show that studying individual differences within one state (such as resting