Cargando…
The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success
Humans differ in their ability to learn how to control their own brain activity by neurofeedback. However, neural mechanisms underlying these inter-individual differences, which may determine training success and associated cognitive enhancement, are not well-understood. Here, it is asked whether ne...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3739027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950741 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00453 |
_version_ | 1782476921657884672 |
---|---|
author | Enriquez-Geppert, Stefanie Huster, René J. Scharfenort, Robert Mokom, Zacharais N. Vosskuhl, Johannes Figge, Christian Zimmermann, Jörg Herrmann, Christoph S. |
author_facet | Enriquez-Geppert, Stefanie Huster, René J. Scharfenort, Robert Mokom, Zacharais N. Vosskuhl, Johannes Figge, Christian Zimmermann, Jörg Herrmann, Christoph S. |
author_sort | Enriquez-Geppert, Stefanie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Humans differ in their ability to learn how to control their own brain activity by neurofeedback. However, neural mechanisms underlying these inter-individual differences, which may determine training success and associated cognitive enhancement, are not well-understood. Here, it is asked whether neurofeedback success of frontal-midline (fm) theta, an oscillation related to higher cognitive functions, could be predicted by the morphology of brain structures known to be critically involved in fm-theta generation. Nineteen young, right-handed participants underwent magnetic resonance imaging of T1-weighted brain images, and took part in an individualized, eight-session neurofeedback training in order to learn how to enhance activity in their fm-theta frequency band. Initial training success, measured at the second training session, was correlated with the final outcome measure. We found that the inferior, superior, and middle frontal cortices were not associated with training success. However, volume of the midcingulate cortex as well as volume and concentration of the underlying white matter structures act as predictor variables for the general responsiveness to training. These findings suggest a neuroanatomical foundation for the ability to learn to control one's own brain activity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3739027 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37390272013-08-15 The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success Enriquez-Geppert, Stefanie Huster, René J. Scharfenort, Robert Mokom, Zacharais N. Vosskuhl, Johannes Figge, Christian Zimmermann, Jörg Herrmann, Christoph S. Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience Humans differ in their ability to learn how to control their own brain activity by neurofeedback. However, neural mechanisms underlying these inter-individual differences, which may determine training success and associated cognitive enhancement, are not well-understood. Here, it is asked whether neurofeedback success of frontal-midline (fm) theta, an oscillation related to higher cognitive functions, could be predicted by the morphology of brain structures known to be critically involved in fm-theta generation. Nineteen young, right-handed participants underwent magnetic resonance imaging of T1-weighted brain images, and took part in an individualized, eight-session neurofeedback training in order to learn how to enhance activity in their fm-theta frequency band. Initial training success, measured at the second training session, was correlated with the final outcome measure. We found that the inferior, superior, and middle frontal cortices were not associated with training success. However, volume of the midcingulate cortex as well as volume and concentration of the underlying white matter structures act as predictor variables for the general responsiveness to training. These findings suggest a neuroanatomical foundation for the ability to learn to control one's own brain activity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-08-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3739027/ /pubmed/23950741 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00453 Text en Copyright © 2013 Enriquez-Geppert, Huster, Scharfenort, Mokom, Vosskuhl, Figge, Zimmermann and Herrmann. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Enriquez-Geppert, Stefanie Huster, René J. Scharfenort, Robert Mokom, Zacharais N. Vosskuhl, Johannes Figge, Christian Zimmermann, Jörg Herrmann, Christoph S. The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title | The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title_full | The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title_fullStr | The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title_full_unstemmed | The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title_short | The morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
title_sort | morphology of midcingulate cortex predicts frontal-midline theta neurofeedback success |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3739027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950741 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00453 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT enriquezgeppertstefanie themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT husterrenej themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT scharfenortrobert themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT mokomzacharaisn themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT vosskuhljohannes themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT figgechristian themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT zimmermannjorg themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT herrmannchristophs themorphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT enriquezgeppertstefanie morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT husterrenej morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT scharfenortrobert morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT mokomzacharaisn morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT vosskuhljohannes morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT figgechristian morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT zimmermannjorg morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess AT herrmannchristophs morphologyofmidcingulatecortexpredictsfrontalmidlinethetaneurofeedbacksuccess |