ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Inducing representational change in the hippocampus through real-time neurofeedback.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human learning of noninvasive brain-computer interfaces via manifold geometry.Nature neuroscience · 2026Article
- Peer-guided movie neurofeedback to facilitate recovery in opioid use disorder.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Sculpting new visual categories into the human brain.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Inducing representational change in the hippocampus through real-time neurofeedback.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
When you perceive or remember something, other related things come to mind, affecting how these competing items are subsequently perceived and remembered. Such behavioural consequences are believed to result from changes in the overlap of neural representations of these items, especially in the hippocampus. According to multiple theories, hippocampal overlap should increase (integration) when there is high coactivation between cortical representations. However, prior studies used indirect proxies for coactivation by manipulating stimulus similarity or task demands. Here, we induce coactivation in visual cortex more directly using closed-loop neurofeedback from real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). While viewing one object, participants were rewarded for activating the representation of another object as strongly as possible. Across multiple real-time fMRI sessions, participants succeeded in using this neurofeedback to increase coactivation. Compared with a baseline of untrained objects, this protocol led to memory integration in behaviour and the brain: the trained objects became harder for participants to discriminate behaviourally in a categorical perception task and harder to discriminate neurally from patterns of fMRI activity in their hippocampus as a result of losing unique features. These findings demonstrate that neurofeedback can be used to alter and combine memories.This article is part of the theme issue 'Neurofeedback: new territories and neurocognitive mechanisms of endogenous neuromodulation'.
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.