ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Online self-evaluation of fMRI-based neurofeedback performance.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Online self-evaluation of fMRI-based neurofeedback performance.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study explores the subjective evaluation of supplementary motor area (SMA) regulation performance in a real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging neurofeedback (fMRI-NF) task. In fMRI-NF, people learn how to self-regulate their brain activity by performing mental actions to achieve a certain target level (TL) of blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) activation. Here, we studied two types of self-evaluation: performance predictions and perceived confidence in the prediction judgement. Participants completed three sessions of SMA regulation in a 7 T fMRI scanner, performing a mental drawing task. During each trial, they modulated their imagery strategy to achieve one of two different levels of SMA activation and reported a performance prediction and their confidence in the prediction before receiving delayed BOLD-activation feedback. Results show that participants' performance predictions improved with learning throughout the three sessions, and that these improvements were not driven exclusively by their knowledge of previous performance. Confidence reports on the other hand showed no change throughout training and did not correlate with better and worse predictions. In addition to shedding light on mechanisms of internal self-evaluation during neurofeedback training, these results also point to a dissociation between predictions of performance and confidence reports in the presence of feedback. This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.