ArticleHuman brain mapping2022
Simultaneous modeling of reaction times and brain dynamics in a spatial cueing task.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Simultaneous modeling of reaction times and brain dynamics in a spatial cueing task.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how brain activity translates into behavior is a grand challenge in neuroscientific research. Simultaneous computational modeling of both measures offers to address this question. The extension of the dynamic causal modeling (DCM) framework for blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) responses to behavior (bDCM) constitutes such a modeling approach. However, only very few studies have employed and evaluated bDCM, and its application has been restricted to binary behavioral responses, limiting more general statements about its validity. This study used bDCM to model reaction times in a spatial attention task, which involved two separate runs with either horizontal or vertical stimulus configurations. We recorded fMRI data and reaction times (n= 26) and compared bDCM with classical DCM and a behavioral Rescorla-Wagner model using Bayesian model selection and goodness of fit statistics. Results indicate that bDCM performed equally well as classical DCM when modeling BOLD responses and as good as the Rescorla-Wagner model when modeling reaction times. Although our data revealed practical limitations of the current bDCM approach that warrant further investigation, we conclude that bDCM constitutes a promising method for investigating the link between brain activity and behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.