Negative BOLD Responses Surpass Positive Responses in Task Specificity, Reflecting Neural Reconfigurations Better Than Functional Connectivity
Gholipour Picha, S.; Hojjati, S. H.; Nayak, S.; Ozoria, S.; Chernek, P.; Calimag, J.; Ghaderi Yazdi, B.; Razlighi, Q. R.
Show abstract
ObjectiveTo investigate whether the Negative BOLD Response (NBR) is more task-specific than the Positive BOLD Response (PBR) during cognitive tasks and to determine whether task-evoked activity reflects brain reconfigurations during different tasks better than functional connectivity. MethodsFunctional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data were collected from 214 participants under 50 years old (152 in Dataset 1 and 62 in Dataset 2) performing twelve cognitive tasks spanning vocabulary, speed of processing, fluid reasoning, and memory domains. Data analysis included subject-level and group-level analyses, focusing on comparing the spatial patterns and task specificity of NBR and PBR through similarity measures using Dice coefficients. Additionally, functional connectivity was assessed using the Multi-session Hierarchical Bayesian Model (MS-HBM) to evaluate its sensitivity to task-induced brain reconfigurations compared to task-evoked activity. ResultsNBR demonstrated significantly greater task specificity compared to PBR across all cognitive tasks, with lower mean Dice coefficients for NBR maps (mean: 0.44, SD: 0.13) than for PBR maps (mean: 0.67, SD: 0.09; t(65) = 18.38, p < 0.001). Functional connectivity analyses indicated that the default mode network (DMN) remained stable across tasks, suggesting that task-evoked activity reflects task-specific brain reconfigurations better than functional connectivity. ConclusionThe findings confirm that NBR is inherently more task-specific than PBR and that task-evoked activity provides a more sensitive measure of task-specific neural reconfigurations than functional connectivity. This enhances our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying cognitive processes and highlights the importance of considering NBR in cognitive neuroscience research.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Atlas for the Lateralized Visuospatial Attention Networks (ALANs): Insights from fMRI and Network Analyses 96%
- Multiple neural pathways to successful visual short-term memory across the adult lifespan 96%
- Intrinsic functional connectivity among memory networks does not predict individual differences in narrative recall 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Distinct but cooperating brain networks supporting semantic cognition 97%
- The functional convergence and heterogeneity of social, episodic, and self-referential thought in the default mode network 97%
- Context-independent scaling of neural responses to task difficulty in the multiple-demand network 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Overlapping attentional networks yield divergent behavioral predictions across tasks: Neuromarkers for diffuse and focused attention? 97%
- Conscientiousness associated with efficiency of the salience/ventral attention network: Replication in three samples using individualized parcellation 96%
- Neural representation of current and intended task sets during sequential judgements on human faces 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Neural Systems Underlying the Implementation of Working Memory Removal Operations 97%
- Switching between external and internal attention in hippocampal networks 96%
- Increased functional connectivity of the intraparietal sulcus underlies the attenuation of numerosity estimations for self-generated words 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.