Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Neuroimage. 2018 Feb 1;166:198-208. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.10.031. Epub 2017 Oct 31.

Intermittent compared to continuous real-time fMRI neurofeedback boosts control over amygdala activation.

Author information

1
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; Laboratory for Social and Neural Systems Research, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Electronic address: lydia.hellrung@econ.uzh.ch.
2
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: adietrich@cbs.mpg.de.
3
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany.
4
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; Department of Neurology, BG University Clinic Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
5
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; Department of Neuroscience Clinique's, University Hospital Genève, Genève, Switzerland.
6
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; Clinics for Cognitive Neurology, University Hospital, Leipzig, Germany; Leipzig University Medical Center, IFB Adiposity Diseases, Leipzig, Germany; Mind and Brain Institute, Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Humboldt-University and Charité, Berlin, Germany.
7
Department of Neurology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany; Leipzig University Medical Center, IFB Adiposity Diseases, Leipzig, Germany.

Abstract

Real-time fMRI neurofeedback is a feasible tool to learn the volitional regulation of brain activity. So far, most studies provide continuous feedback information that is presented upon every volume acquisition. Although this maximizes the temporal resolution of feedback information, it may be accompanied by some disadvantages. Participants can be distracted from the regulation task due to (1) the intrinsic delay of the hemodynamic response and associated feedback and (2) limited cognitive resources available to simultaneously evaluate feedback information and stay engaged with the task. Here, we systematically investigate differences between groups presented with different variants of feedback (continuous vs. intermittent) and a control group receiving no feedback on their ability to regulate amygdala activity using positive memories and feelings. In contrast to the feedback groups, no learning effect was observed in the group without any feedback presentation. The group receiving intermittent feedback exhibited better amygdala regulation performance when compared with the group receiving continuous feedback. Behavioural measurements show that these effects were reflected in differences in task engagement. Overall, we not only demonstrate that the presentation of feedback is a prerequisite to learn volitional control of amygdala activity but also that intermittent feedback is superior to continuous feedback presentation.

KEYWORDS:

Amygdala; Continuous feedback; Intermittent feedback; Neurofeedback; Real-time fMRI

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center