Improved modulation of rostrolateral prefrontal cortex using real-time fMRI training and meta-cognitive awareness

McCaig, R.G.; Dixon, Matthew L.; Keramatian, Kamyar; Liu, Irene; Christoff, Kalina

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.12.016

Cited by 105 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Out of over 70 published rtfMRI-nf studies, very few reported that participants were unable to modulate brain hemodynamics (Berman, Horovitz, Venkataraman, & Hallett, 2011;Hampson et al, 2011). Other experiments using rtfMRI-nf, using sham-feedback as control, demonstrated that participants increased their ability to modulate a particular brain region throughout training Caria, Sitaram, Veit, Begliomini, & Birbaumer, 2010;Chiew, Laconte, & Graham, 2012;Hui et al, 2014;Lawrence et al, 2014;McCaig, Dixon, Keramatian, Liu, & Christoff, 2011;Rota et al, 2009;Rota, Handjaras, Sitaram, Birbaumer, & Dogil, 2011;Yoo, Lee, O'Leary, Panych, & Jolesz, 2008;Young et al, 2014;Zotev, Phillips, Young, Drevets, & Bodurka, 2013;Zotev et al, 2011). Many other studies often lacked necessary controls or appropriate analyses to determine that veritable neurofeedback was the primary factor accounting for the observed brain alterations (Thibault et al, 2015); Figure 2 depicts some common control conditions.…”

Section: Fmrimentioning

confidence: 99%

The self-regulating brain and neurofeedback: Experimental science and clinical promise

Thibault

Lifshitz

Raz

2016

Cortex

218

198

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neurofeedback, one of the primary examples of self-regulation, designates a collection of techniques that train the brain and help to improve its function. Since coming on the scene in the 1960s, electroencephalography-neurofeedback has become a treatment vehicle for a host of mental disorders; however, its clinical effectiveness remains controversial. Modern imaging technologies of the living human brain (e.g., real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging) and increasingly rigorous research protocols that utilize such methodologies begin to shed light on the underlying mechanisms that may facilitate more effective clinical applications. In this paper we focus on recent technological advances in the field of human brain imaging and discuss how these modern methods may influence the field of neurofeedback. Toward this end, we outline the state of the evidence and sketch out future directions to further explore the potential merits of this contentious therapeutic prospect.

show abstract

Section: Fmrimentioning

confidence: 99%

The self-regulating brain and neurofeedback: Experimental science and clinical promise

Thibault

Lifshitz

Raz

2016

Cortex

218

198

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individual differences with respect to a given skill invite the question of whether that skill can be ameliorated, and a recent study involving extensive training supports the idea that well-trained subjects can provide accurate and useful introspective reports [6] (though direct improvement of introspection through training has yet to be demonstrated, to our knowledge). Further, RLPFC/ BA10, thought to be a key region involved in introspection and metacognitive awareness [7], is amenable to voluntary up-and down-regulation through real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) neurofeedback training [8]. This functional plasticity [8] and structural heterogeneity [5] in frontal regions key to introspection thus provides a possible neural basis for interindividual differences, and possibly intra-individual enhancements, in introspective accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, RLPFC/ BA10, thought to be a key region involved in introspection and metacognitive awareness [7], is amenable to voluntary up-and down-regulation through real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) neurofeedback training [8]. This functional plasticity [8] and structural heterogeneity [5] in frontal regions key to introspection thus provides a possible neural basis for interindividual differences, and possibly intra-individual enhancements, in introspective accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meditation Experience Predicts Introspective Accuracy

Fox¹,

Dixon²,

Ellamil³

et al. 2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accuracy of subjective reports, especially those involving introspection of one's own internal processes, remains unclear, and research has demonstrated large individual differences in introspective accuracy. It has been hypothesized that introspective accuracy may be heightened in persons who engage in meditation practices, due to the highly introspective nature of such practices. We undertook a preliminary exploration of this hypothesis, examining introspective accuracy in a cross-section of meditation practitioners (1-15,000 hrs experience). Introspective accuracy was assessed by comparing subjective reports of tactile sensitivity for each of 20 body regions during a 'body-scanning' meditation with averaged, objective measures of tactile sensitivity (mean size of body representation area in primary somatosensory cortex; two-point discrimination threshold) as reported in prior research. Expert meditators showed significantly better introspective accuracy than novices; overall meditation experience also significantly predicted individual introspective accuracy. These results suggest that long-term meditators provide more accurate introspective reports than novices.

show abstract

“…For example, self-related processing activates the temporopolar cortex as consistently as the three main default network regions (mPFC, Precuneus/ PCC and TPJ) [34], and is also frequently associated with activations in the insula and lateral PFC [6]. Furthermore, introspective mental processes have been linked to a recruitment of the anterior portion of the lateral PFC, namely the rostrolateral PFC [35][36][37], which is considered to be part of a cognitive control network separable from the default network [38]. These findings indicate that selfreferential processing is not uniquely associated with task-negative/default-network regions.…”

Section: Sensorimotor Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Specifying the Self for Cognitive Neuroscience

Christoff¹,

Cosmelli²,

Legrand³

et al. 2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive neuroscience investigations of self-experience have mainly focused on the mental attribution of features to the self (self-related processing). In this paper, we highlight another fundamental, yet neglected, aspect of self-experience, that of being an agent. We propose that this aspect of self-experience depends on self-specifying processes, ones that implicitly specify the self by implementing a functional self/non-self distinction in perception, action, cognition and emotion. We describe two paradigmatic cases -sensorimotor integration and homeostatic regulation -and use the principles from these cases to show how cognitive control, including emotion regulation, is also self-specifying. We argue that externally directed, attention-demanding tasks, rather than suppressing self-experience, give rise to the selfexperience of being a cognitive-affective agent. We conclude with directions for experimental work based on our framework.Investigating self-experience in cognitive neuroscience How does the embodied brain give rise to self-experience? This question, long addressed by neurology [1] and neurophysiology [2], now attracts strong interest from cognitive neuroscience and the neuroimaging community [3][4][5][6].Recent neuroimaging studies have investigated selfexperience mainly by employing paradigms that contrast self-related with non-self-related stimuli and tasks. Such paradigms aim to reveal the cerebral correlates of 'selfrelated processing' (see Glossary). Recent reviews identify several brain regions that appear most consistently activated in self-related paradigms such as assessing one's personality, physical appearance or feelings; recognizing one's face; or detecting one's first name (see [4,6] for extensive reviews). The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and the precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex (Precuneus/ PCC) are the most frequently discussed [4-10], but two additional regions, the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and temporal pole, are also consistently activated [6].Although these studies have contributed valuable information about the neural correlates of self-related processing, two issues have recently arisen [3,6]. First, the identified regions, especially the midline regions (mPFC, Precuneus/PCC) often associated with self-related processing [4,[7][8][9][10], might not be self-specific, because they are also recruited for a wide range of other cognitive processes -recall of information from memory, inferential reasoning, and representing others' mental states [3,5,6]. In addition, the PCC appears to be engaged in attentional processes and might be a hub for attention and motivation [11,12], whereas the TPJ is important for attentional reorienting [13]. Hence, describing these regions (singly or collectively) as self-specific could be unwarranted [3,5,6]. Second, studies employing self-related processing approach self-experience through the self-attribution of mental and physical features, and thereby focus on the self as an object of attribution and not the self as the knowing subje...

show abstract

Improved modulation of rostrolateral prefrontal cortex using real-time fMRI training and meta-cognitive awareness

Cited by 105 publications

References 76 publications

The self-regulating brain and neurofeedback: Experimental science and clinical promise

The self-regulating brain and neurofeedback: Experimental science and clinical promise

Meditation Experience Predicts Introspective Accuracy

Specifying the Self for Cognitive Neuroscience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About