Cited by 99Neural dynamics and brain functionAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

On the relationship between slow cortical potentials and BOLD signal changes in humans

Open access
Khader, Patrick, Schicke, Tobias, Röder, Brigitte, Rösler, Frank·2008·International Journal of Psychophysiology

Abstract

This review summarizes experimental studies that investigated the relationship between DC-recorded slow event-related potentials (slow waves) of the electroencephalogram (EEG) and the hemodynamic BOLD response, as measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Slow waves have been found to accompany a large number of cognitive processes in a systematic and topographically specific way, and have thus been successfully employed in psychophysiological experiments to dissociate cognitive functions by means of their slow wave topography. Recently, however, several independent studies, using different experimental paradigms, suggest the existence of another feature of slow waves, i.e., a close relationship with the fMRI BOLD response. Some of these studies found couplings between slow waves and BOLD signals in various brain regions, using simultaneous EEG-fMRI recordings. Others found similar task-related activation patterns of slow waves (i.e., scalp topographies) and BOLD responses (i.e., activated voxel profiles), as well as corresponding parametric increases of signal strength with increasing task difficulty. The close relationship between slow waves and BOLD responses reported here concerns a low frequency range of the EEG signal (<1 Hz) that has so far received less attention in studies on the correspondence between EEG and fMRI than the higher frequencies, and therefore adds to the various findings obtained at higher EEG frequencies. Implications for the use of slow waves for neuroscientific research are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.05.018

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 67 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khader, P., Schicke, T., Röder, B., & Rösler, F.
Affiliations
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
  • Universität Hamburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Khader, Patrick
Venue
International Journal of Psychophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-03
Volume
67
Issue
3
Pages
252-261
ISSN
0167-8760 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2162786775
Cited by
99
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
slow cortical potentials, BOLD signal, hemodynamic response, low-frequency EEG, simultaneous EEG-fMRI, task-related brain activation, task difficulty
MeSH terms
Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Oxygen, Psychophysiology

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