Real-time fMRI (rtfMRI) neurofeedback (NF) facilitates volitional control over brain activity and the modulation of associated mental functions. The NF signals of traditional rtfMRI-NF studies predominantly reflect neuronal activity within ROIs. In this study, we describe a novel rtfMRI-NF approach that includes a functional connectivity (FC) component in the NF signal (FC-added rtfMRI-NF). We estimated the efficacy of the FC-added rtfMRI-NF method by applying it to nicotine-dependent heavy smokers in an effort to reduce cigarette craving. ACC and medial pFC as well as the posterior cingulate cortex and precuneus are associated with cigarette craving and were chosen as ROIs. Fourteen heavy smokers were randomly assigned to receive one of two types of NF: traditional activity-based rtfMRI-NF or FC-added rtfMRI-NF. Participants received rtfMRI-NF training during two separate visits after overnight smoking cessation, and cigarette craving score was assessed. The FC-added rtfMRI-NF resulted in greater neuronal activity and increased FC between the targeted ROIs than the traditional activity-based rtfMRI-NF and resulted in lower craving score. In the FC-added rtfMRI-NF condition, the average of neuronal activity and FC was tightly associated with craving score (Bonferroni-corrected p = .028). However, in the activity-based rtfMRI-NF condition, no association was detected (uncorrected p > .081). Non-rtfMRI data analysis also showed enhanced neuronal activity and FC with FC-added NF than with activity-based NF. These results demonstrate that FC-added rtfMRI-NF facilitates greater volitional control over brain activity and connectivity and greater modulation of mental function than activity-based rtfMRI-NF.

No abstract

No abstract

Neurofeedback training has been shown to influence behavior in healthy participants as well as to alleviate clinical symptoms in neurological, psychosomatic, and psychiatric patient populations. However, many real‐time fMRI neurofeedback studies report large inter‐individual differences in learning success. The factors that cause this vast variability between participants remain unknown and their identification could enhance treatment success. Thus, here we employed a meta‐analytic approach including data from 24 different neurofeedback studies with a total of 401 participants, including 140 patients, to determine whether levels of activity in target brain regions during pretraining functional localizer or no‐feedback runs (i.e., self‐regulation in the absence of neurofeedback) could predict neurofeedback learning success. We observed a slightly positive correlation between pretraining activity levels during a functional localizer run and neurofeedback learning success, but we were not able to identify common brain‐based success predictors across our diverse cohort of studies. Therefore, advances need to be made in finding robust models and measures of general neurofeedback learning, and in increasing the current study database to allow for investigating further factors that might influence neurofeedback learning.

No abstract