Functional neuroimaging and brain connectivity
•
Why bother?
–
The brain adheres to certain principles of functional segregation
but these are insufficient to describe its operations satisfactorily
–
A description of regional patterns of activity in terms of causal
relationships with other brain regions obviates some of the
theoretical constraints in the simple brain mapping approach
–
A better model for some brain disorders?
Functional Connectivity vs. Effective Connectivity
•
Functional Connectivity
–
the temporal correlation of spatially remote
neurophysiological events
•
Effective Connectivity
–
The influential relationship between one brain region
and another
An observed inter-regional correlation…
These two regions are functionally connected. The observation
of correlation is an observation of functional connectivity.
They may be Effectively connected. The observation of
correlation is compatible with this but also with other
possibilities.
r
Why might we observe functional connectivity?
Because of effective connectivity i.e. a uni-or bi-directional influential
(‘effective’) relationship
Why might we observe functional
connectivity?
No effective connectivity between the two regions. Correlation arises
due to the common influence of a third factor (region or task)
How do we represent connectivity?
•Descriptive
•Correlative
•Psychophysiological
interaction/physiophysiological
interaction
•Path analysis/structural equation
modelling/DCM
Functional
Effective
Data-led
Model-based
This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
Observation of task-related coactivation is a rather
unsatisfying index of inter-regional connectivity
Produced by a standard analysis of task-related activation, representing
simply a different theoretical treatment of the results
Regions thus implicated may not be directly correlated (correlation is
not transitive)
Non-transitivity of separate regional task-associated
activations
Task
Baseline
Region 1
Region 2
Correlative analysis
Requires some a priori model (albeit a simple one)
Y
(1-n)
= c +
ß
.X
(1-n)
+
Є
X = voxel/region of interest
Y = every other region
ß
= functional connectivity between X and Y
Ultimately, this approach - though it ensures that two regions do indeed
correlate
- adds little to a simple description of regional co-activation.
Psychophysiological interaction/
Physiophysiological interaction (PPI)
•
The observation of task- or context-dependent inter-
regional covariance
•
Measures the ways in which a given region ‘predicts’
activity in other brain regions.
•
This has been referred to as the (context-dependent)
‘contribution’ of activity in one area to that in another
(here contribution is used used in a statistical sense –
contributes to an explanation of the variance)
The convolved signal
•
A burst of neuronal firing is succeeded by a
haemodynamic response (the form of which we think that
we know in advance).

This is the end of the preview.
Sign up
to
access the rest of the document.
- Spring '10
- Cudeback
- canonical correlation analysis, Functional Connectivity
-
Click to edit the document details