4.3 Article

EEG Microstate Correlates of Fluid Intelligence and Response to Cognitive Training

期刊

BRAIN TOPOGRAPHY
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 502-520

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10548-017-0565-z

关键词

Fluid intelligence; Abstract reasoning; Microstates; EEG; Cognitive training

资金

  1. Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) [2014-13121700007]
  2. Berenson-Allen Foundation
  3. Sidney R. Baer Jr. Foundation
  4. National Institutes of Health [R01HD069776, R01NS073601, R21 MH099196, R21 NS082870, R21 NS085491, R21 HD07616]
  5. Harvard Catalyst \ The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (NCRR) [UL1 RR025758]
  6. Harvard Catalyst \ The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (NCATS NIH) [UL1 RR025758]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The neurobiological correlates of human fluid intelligence (Gf) remain elusive. Here, we demonstrate that spatiotemporal dynamics of EEG activity correlate with baseline measures of Gf and with its modulation by cognitive training. EEG dynamics were assessed in 74 healthy participants by examination of fast-changing, recurring, topographically-defined electric patterns termed microstates, which characterize the electrophysiological activity of distributed cortical networks. We find that the frequency of appearance of specific brain topographies, spatially associated with visual (microstate B) and executive control (microstate C) networks, respectively, is inversely related to Gf scores. Moreover, changes in Gf scores with cognitive training are inversely correlated with changes in microstate properties, indicating that the changes in brain network dynamics are behaviorally relevant. Finally, we find that cognitive training that increases Gf scores results in a posterior shift in the topography of microstate C. These results highlight the role of fast-changing brain electrical states in individual variability in Gf and in the response to cognitive training.

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

4.3
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