Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Neuroimage ; 195: 300-310, 2019 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30954707

ABSTRACT

The neural correlates of specific brain functions such as visual orientation tuning and individual finger movements can be revealed using multivoxel pattern analysis (MVPA) of fMRI data. Neurofeedback based on these distributed patterns of brain activity presents a unique ability for precise neuromodulation. Recent applications of this technique, known as decoded neurofeedback, have manipulated fear conditioning, visual perception, confidence judgements and facial preference. However, there has yet to be an empirical justification of the timing and data processing parameters of these experiments. Suboptimal parameter settings could impact the efficacy of neurofeedback learning and contribute to the 'non-responder' effect. The goal of this study was to investigate how design parameters of decoded neurofeedback experiments affect decoding accuracy and neurofeedback performance. Subjects participated in three fMRI sessions: two 'finger localizer' sessions to identify the fMRI patterns associated with each of the four fingers of the right hand, and one 'finger finding' neurofeedback session to assess neurofeedback performance. Using only the localizer data, we show that real-time decoding can be degraded by poor experiment timing or ROI selection. To set key parameters for the neurofeedback session, we used offline simulations of decoded neurofeedback using data from the localizer sessions to predict neurofeedback performance. We show that these predictions align with real neurofeedback performance at the group level and can also explain individual differences in neurofeedback success. Overall, this work demonstrates the usefulness of offline simulation to improve the success of real-time decoded neurofeedback experiments.


Subject(s)
Brain Mapping/methods , Machine Learning , Neurofeedback/methods , Sensorimotor Cortex/physiology , Adult , Female , Humans , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Research Design
2.
PLoS Comput Biol ; 13(7): e1005681, 2017 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28753639

ABSTRACT

Direct manipulation of brain activity can be used to investigate causal brain-behavior relationships. Current noninvasive neural stimulation techniques are too coarse to manipulate behaviors that correlate with fine-grained spatial patterns recorded by fMRI. However, these activity patterns can be manipulated by having people learn to self-regulate their own recorded neural activity. This technique, known as fMRI neurofeedback, faces challenges as many participants are unable to self-regulate. The causes of this non-responder effect are not well understood due to the cost and complexity of such investigation in the MRI scanner. Here, we investigated the temporal dynamics of the hemodynamic response measured by fMRI as a potential cause of the non-responder effect. Learning to self-regulate the hemodynamic response involves a difficult temporal credit-assignment problem because this signal is both delayed and blurred over time. Two factors critical to this problem are the prescribed self-regulation strategy (cognitive or automatic) and feedback timing (continuous or intermittent). Here, we sought to evaluate how these factors interact with the temporal dynamics of fMRI without using the MRI scanner. We first examined the role of cognitive strategies by having participants learn to regulate a simulated neurofeedback signal using a unidimensional strategy: pressing one of two buttons to rotate a visual grating that stimulates a model of visual cortex. Under these conditions, continuous feedback led to faster regulation compared to intermittent feedback. Yet, since many neurofeedback studies prescribe implicit self-regulation strategies, we created a computational model of automatic reward-based learning to examine whether this result held true for automatic processing. When feedback was delayed and blurred based on the hemodynamics of fMRI, this model learned more reliably from intermittent feedback compared to continuous feedback. These results suggest that different self-regulation mechanisms prefer different feedback timings, and that these factors can be effectively explored and optimized via simulation prior to deployment in the MRI scanner.


Subject(s)
Hemodynamics/physiology , Learning/physiology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Models, Neurological , Neurofeedback/physiology , Adolescent , Adult , Brain/physiology , Female , Humans , Male , Neuroimaging , Visual Cortex/physiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...