Independent Components of Neural Activation Associated with 100 Days of Cognitive Training

Age differences in functional network reconfiguration with working memory training

Demanding cognitive functions like working memory (WM) depend on functional brain networks being able to communicate efficiently while also maintaining some degree of modularity. Evidence suggests that aging can disrupt this balance between integration and modularity. In this study, we examined how cognitive training affects the integration and modularity of functional networks in older and younger adults. Twenty three younger and 23 older adults participated in 10 days of verbal WM training, leading to performance gains in both age groups. Older adults exhibited lower modularity overall and a greater decrement when switching from rest to task, compared to younger adults. Interestingly, younger but not older adults showed increased task-related modularity with training. Furthermore, whereas training increased efficiency within, and decreased participation of, the default-mode network for younger adults, it enhanced efficiency within a task-specific salience/sensorimotor network for older adults. Finally, training increased segregation of the default-mode from frontoparietal/salience and visual networks in younger adults, while it diffusely increased between-network connectivity in older adults. Thus, while younger adults increase network segregation with training, suggesting more automated processing, older adults persist in, and potentially amplify, a more integrated and costly global workspace, suggesting different age-related trajectories in functional network reorganization with WM training.

Can we predict real-time fMRI neurofeedback learning success from pretraining brain activity?

Neurofeedback training has been shown to influence behavior in healthy participants as well as to alleviate clinical symptoms in neurological, psychosomatic, and psychiatric patient populations. However, many real-time fMRI neurofeedback studies report large inter-individual differences in learning success. The factors that cause this vast variability between participants remain unknown and their identification could enhance treatment success. Thus, here we employed a meta-analytic approach including data from 24 different neurofeedback studies with a total of 401 participants, including 140 patients, to determine whether levels of activity in target brain regions during pretraining functional localizer or no-feedback runs (i.e., self-regulation in the absence of neurofeedback) could predict neurofeedback learning success. We observed a slightly positive correlation between pretraining activity levels during a functional localizer run and neurofeedback learning success, but we were not able to identify common brain-based success predictors across our diverse cohort of studies. Therefore, advances need to be made in finding robust models and measures of general neurofeedback learning, and in increasing the current study database to allow for investigating further factors that might influence neurofeedback learning.

MRI Predictors of Cognitive Training Outcomes

The prospect of improving or maintaining cognitive functioning has provoked a steadily increasing number of cognitive training interventions over the last years, especially for clinical and elderly populations. However, there are discrepancies between the findings of the studies. One of the reasons behind these heterogeneous findings is that there are vast inter-individual differences in how people benefit from the training and in the extent that training-related gains are transferred to other untrained tasks and domains. In this paper, we address the value of incorporating neural measures to cognitive training studies in order to fully understand the mechanisms leading to inter-individual differences in training gains and their generalizability to other tasks. Our perspective is that it is necessary to collect multimodal neural measures in the pre- and post-training phase, which can enable us to understand the factors contributing to successful training outcomes. More importantly, this understanding can enable us to predict who will benefit from different types of interventions, thereby allowing the development of individually tailored intervention programs.