Cited by 154Mind wandering and attentionMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Real-time fMRI links subjective experience with brain activity during focused attention

Open access
Garrison, Kathleen A., Scheinost, Dustin, Worhunsky, Patrick D., Elwafi, Hani M., Thornhill, Thomas A., Thompson, Evan, Saron, Clifford, Desbordes, Gaëlle +6 more·2013·NeuroImage

Abstract

Recent advances in brain imaging have improved the measure of neural processes related to perceptual, cognitive and affective functions, yet the relation between brain activity and subjective experience remains poorly characterized. In part, it is a challenge to obtain reliable accounts of participant's experience in such studies. Here we addressed this limitation by utilizing experienced meditators who are expert in introspection. We tested a novel method to link objective and subjective data, using real-time fMRI (rt-fMRI) to provide participants with feedback of their own brain activity during an ongoing task. We provided real-time feedback during a focused attention task from the posterior cingulate cortex, a hub of the default mode network shown to be activated during mind-wandering and deactivated during meditation. In a first experiment, both meditators and non-meditators reported significant correspondence between the feedback graph and their subjective experience of focused attention and mind-wandering. When instructed to volitionally decrease the feedback graph, meditators, but not non-meditators, showed significant deactivation of the posterior cingulate cortex. We were able to replicate these results in a separate group of meditators using a novel step-wise rt-fMRI discovery protocol in which participants were not provided with prior knowledge of the expected relationship between their experience and the feedback graph (i.e., focused attention versus mind-wandering). These findings support the feasibility of using rt-fMRI to link objective measures of brain activity with reports of ongoing subjective experience in cognitive neuroscience research, and demonstrate the generalization of expertise in introspective awareness to novel contexts.

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.neuroimage.2013.05.030

Cites

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?

  • Neurophenomenological studies suggest that this may be because of the ability to observe thoughts and emotions rather than being caught up in them.

    “and neurophenomenological studies suggest that this may be because of the ability to observe thoughts and emotions rather than being caught up in them [35-37].”

    From Clinical Efficacy and Psychological Mechanisms of an App-Based Digital Therapeutic for Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial (2021) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes experienced meditators as practiced in monitoring moment-to-moment experience, and the Results distinguish focused attention from mind-wandering and self-referential processing. The paper does not establish that observing thoughts and emotions rather than being caught up in them explains the effect alluded to by “this.” (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 154

Authors
Garrison, K. A., Scheinost, D., Worhunsky, P. D., Elwafi, H. M., Thornhill, T. A., Thompson, E., Saron, C., Desbordes, G., Kober, H., Hampson, M., Gray, J. R., Constable, R. T., Papademetris, X., & Brewer, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Brewer, Judson A.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-11
Volume
81
Pages
110-118
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032187623
Cited by
154
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6
FWCI
7.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K12-DA00167, 1R03DA029163-01A1)
  • U.S. Veterans Affairs New England Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center
  • Jeffrey C. Walker
  • Austin Hearst
  • 1440 Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
real-time fMRI, subjective experience, focused attention, mind wandering, posterior cingulate cortex, default mode network, meditation, introspective awareness, experienced meditators, neural correlates of attention
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Meditation, Neurofeedback

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