Cited by 277Neural dynamics and brain functionFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Using graph theoretical analysis of multi channel EEG to evaluate the neural efficiency hypothesis

Micheloyannis, Sifis, Pachou, Ellie, Stam, Cornelis J., Vourkas, Michael, Erimaki, Sophia, Tsirka, Vasso·2006·Neuroscience Letters

Abstract

Previous studies demonstrated that intelligence is significantly related to an impressive array of psychological, social, biological and genetic factors and that working memory (WM) can be considered as a general cognitive resource strongly related with a wide variety of higher order cognitive competencies and intelligence. Also, evaluating the WM of subjects might allow one to test the neural efficiency hypothesis (NEH). WM typically involves functional interactions between frontal and parietal cortices. We recorded EEG signals to study neuronal interactions during one WM test in individuals who had few years of formal education (LE) as compared to individuals with university degrees (UE). The two groups of individuals differed in the scores they obtained in psychological tests. To quantify the synchronization between EEG channels in several frequency bands, we evaluated the "synchronization likelihood" (SL), which takes into consideration nonlinear processes as well as linear ones. SL was then converted into graphs to estimate the distance from "small-world network" (SWN) organization, i.e., an optimally organized network that would give rise to the data. In comparison to LE subjects, those with university degrees exhibited less prominent SWN properties in most frequency bands during the WM task. This finding supports the NEH and suggests that the connections between brain areas of well-educated subjects engaged in WM tasks are not as well-organized in the sense of SWN.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neulet.2006.04.006

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 32 · Cited by 277

Authors
Micheloyannis, S., Pachou, E., Stam, C. J., Vourkas, M., Erimaki, S., & Tsirka, V.
Affiliations
  • University of Crete (GR)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Micheloyannis, Sifis
Venue
Neuroscience Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-07
Volume
402
Issue
3
Pages
273-277
ISSN
0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2041684398
Cited by
277
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 22
FWCI
7.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
neural efficiency hypothesis, working memory, small-world networks, graph theory, educational attainment, intelligence, nonlinear coupling, frequency bands
MeSH terms
Adult, Educational Status, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Neurons, Psychometrics

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