Vision- and touch-dependent brain correlates of body-related mental processing.

In humans, the nature of sensory input influences body-related mental processing. For instance, behavioral differences (e.g., response time) can be found between mental spatial transformations (e.g., mental rotation) of viewed and touched body parts. It can thus be hypothesized that distinct brain activation patterns are associated with such sensory-dependent body-related mental processing. However, direct evidence that the neural correlates of body-related mental processing can be modulated by the nature of the sensory stimuli is still missing. We thus analyzed event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from thirty-one healthy participants performing mental rotation of visually- (images) and haptically-presented (plastic) hands. We also dissociated the neural activity related to rotation or task-related performance using models that either regressed out or included the variance associated with response time. Haptically-mediated mental rotation recruited mostly the sensorimotor brain network. Visually-mediated mental rotation led to parieto-occipital activations. In addition, faster mental rotation was associated with sensorimotor activity, while slower mental rotation was associated with parieto-occipital activations. The fMRI results indicated that changing the type of sensory inputs modulates the neural correlates of body-related mental processing. These findings suggest that distinct sensorimotor brain dynamics can be exploited to execute similar tasks depending on the available sensory input. The present study can contribute to a better evaluation of body-related mental processing in experimental and clinical settings.

Predictors of real-time fMRI neurofeedback performance and improvement - A machine learning mega-analysis.

Real-time fMRI neurofeedback is an increasingly popular neuroimaging technique that allows an individual to gain control over his/her own brain signals, which can lead to improvements in behavior in healthy participants as well as to improvements of clinical symptoms in patient populations. However, a considerably large ratio of participants undergoing neurofeedback training do not learn to control their own brain signals and, consequently, do not benefit from neurofeedback interventions, which limits clinical efficacy of neurofeedback interventions. As neurofeedback success varies between studies and participants, it is important to identify factors that might influence neurofeedback success. Here, for the first time, we employed a big data machine learning approach to investigate the influence of 20 different design-specific (e.g. activity vs. connectivity feedback), region of interest-specific (e.g. cortical vs. subcortical) and subject-specific factors (e.g. age) on neurofeedback performance and improvement in 608 participants from 28 independent experiments. With a classification accuracy of 60% (considerably different from chance level), we identified two factors that significantly influenced neurofeedback performance: Both the inclusion of a pre-training no-feedback run before neurofeedback training and neurofeedback training of patients as compared to healthy participants were associated with better neurofeedback performance. The positive effect of pre-training no-feedback runs on neurofeedback performance might be due to the familiarization of participants with the neurofeedback setup and the mental imagery task before neurofeedback training runs. Better performance of patients as compared to healthy participants might be driven by higher motivation of patients, higher ranges for the regulation of dysfunctional brain signals, or a more extensive piloting of clinical experimental paradigms. Due to the large heterogeneity of our dataset, these findings likely generalize across neurofeedback studies, thus providing guidance for designing more efficient neurofeedback studies specifically for improving clinical neurofeedback-based interventions. To facilitate the development of data-driven recommendations for specific design details and subpopulations the field would benefit from stronger engagement in open science research practices and data sharing.

Can we predict real-time fMRI neurofeedback learning success from pretraining brain activity?

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.

Network-based fMRI-neurofeedback training of sustained attention.

The brain regions supporting sustained attention (sustained attention network; SAN) and mind-wandering (default-mode network; DMN) have been extensively studied. Nevertheless, this knowledge has not yet been translated into advanced brain-based attention training protocols. Here, we used network-based real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to provide healthy individuals with information about current activity levels in SAN and DMN. Specifically, 15 participants trained to control the difference between SAN and DMN hemodynamic activity and completed behavioral attention tests before and after neurofeedback training. Through training, participants improved controlling the differential SAN-DMN feedback signal, which was accomplished mainly through deactivating DMN. After training, participants were able to apply learned self-regulation of the differential feedback signal even when feedback was no longer available (i.e., during transfer runs). The neurofeedback group improved in sustained attention after training, although this improvement was temporally limited and rarely exceeded mere practice effects that were controlled by a test-retest behavioral control group. The learned self-regulation and the behavioral outcomes suggest that neurofeedback training of differential SAN and DMN activity has the potential to become a non-invasive and non-pharmacological tool to enhance attention and mitigate specific attention deficits.