4.5 Article

Effective Connectivity Analysis of the Brain Network in Drivers during Actual Driving Using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00211

关键词

near-infrared spectroscopy; effective connectivity; Granger causality; actual driving; cognitive workload

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31771071, 11732015]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for Central Public Welfare Research Institutes [118009001000160001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Driving a vehicle is a complex activity that requires high-level brain functions. This study aimed to assess the change in effective connectivity (EC) between the prefrontal cortex (PFC), motor-related areas (MA) and vision-related areas (VA) in the brain network among the resting, simple-driving and car-following states. Twelve young male right-handed adults were recruited to participate in an actual driving experiment. The brain delta [HbO(2)] signals were continuously recorded using functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) instruments. The conditional Granger causality (GC) analysis, which is a data-driven method that can explore the causal interactions among different brain areas, was performed to evaluate the EC. The results demonstrated that the hemodynamic activity level of the brain increased with an increase in the cognitive workload. The connection strength among PFC, MA and VA increased from the resting state to the simple-driving state, whereas the connection strength relatively decreased during the car-following task. The PFC in EC appeared as the causal target, while the MA and VA appeared as the causal sources. However, I-MA turned into causal targets with the subtask of car-following. These findings indicate that the hemodynamic activity level of the cerebral cortex increases linearly with increasing cognitive workload. The EC of the brain network can be strengthened by a cognitive workload, but also can be weakened by a superfluous cognitive workload such as driving with subtasks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据