Cited by 684Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications

Analysing connectivity with Granger causality and dynamic causal modelling

Open access
Friston, Karl, Moran, Rosalyn, Seth, Anil K·2013·Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Abstract

This review considers state-of-the-art analyses of functional integration in neuronal macrocircuits. We focus on detecting and estimating directed connectivity in neuronal networks using Granger causality (GC) and dynamic causal modelling (DCM). These approaches are considered in the context of functional segregation and integration and--within functional integration--the distinction between functional and effective connectivity. We review recent developments that have enjoyed a rapid uptake in the discovery and quantification of functional brain architectures. GC and DCM have distinct and complementary ambitions that are usefully considered in relation to the detection of functional connectivity and the identification of models of effective connectivity. We highlight the basic ideas upon which they are grounded, provide a comparative evaluation and point to some outstanding issues.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conb.2012.11.010

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dynamic causal models (DCMs) allow one to infer directed synaptic connections (effective connectivity) from neuroimaging or electrophysiological data.

    “dynamic causal models (DCMs; for reviews see Daunizeau et al., 2011; Friston et al., 2013) allow one to infer directed synaptic connections (effective connectivity) from neuroimaging or electrophysiological data.”
  • Functional connectivity by itself does not disclose the mechanisms by which the measured signals were caused and may be vulnerable to confounds at the measurement level.

    “Although advanced measures of functional connectivity can unearth directed influences (Friston et al., 2013; Seth et al., 2013), by itself functional connectivity does not disclose the mechanisms by which the measured signals were caused and may be vulnerable to confounds at the measurement level.”
  • Dynamic causal modeling and Granger causality algorithms are fundamentally different despite some similarities.

    “While there are some similarities between DCM and Granger causality algorithms, they are fundamentally different (111).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friston, K., Moran, R., & Seth, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Friston, Karl
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-04
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
172-178
ISSN
0959-4388 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018305040
Cited by
684
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 25
FWCI
2.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurobiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • EPSRC
  • Dr. Mortimer and Theresa Sackler Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
Granger causality, dynamic causal modeling, directed connectivity, functional connectivity, effective connectivity, functional segregation, functional integration, brain network architecture, causal inference
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Neurons, Causality, Nonlinear Dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review