Cited by 428EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain function

Single-trial EEG–fMRI reveals the dynamics of cognitive function

Open access
Debener, Stefan, Ullsperger, Markus, Siegel, Markus, Engel, Andreas K.·2006·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Two major non-invasive techniques in cognitive neuroscience, electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have complementary advantages with regard to their spatial and temporal resolution. Recent hardware and software developments have made it feasible to acquire EEG and fMRI data simultaneously. We emphasize the potential of simultaneous EEG and fMRI recordings to pursue new strategies in cognitive neuroimaging. Specifically, we propose that, by exploiting the combined spatiotemporal resolution of the methods, the integration of EEG and fMRI recordings on a single-trial level enables the rich temporal dynamics of information processing to be characterized within spatially well-defined neural networks.

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.tics.2006.09.010

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • For event-like tasks or stimuli, EEG features derived from single-trial potential variations correlate with fMRI and expose the timing of information processing in task-related networks.

    “Moreover, for event-like tasks or stimuli, EEG features may also be extracted from temporal variations in single-trial potentials, and their correlations with fMRI reveal rich temporal dynamics of information processing in task-evoked neural networks (176, 177).”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Iain A. Wilson, Michela Gallagher, Howard Eichenbaum and Heikki Tanila Trends in Neurosciences DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2006.10.002 Targeting adenosine A2A receptors in Parkinson's disease · DOI
  2. Michael A. Schwarzschild, Luigi Agnati, Kjell Fuxe, Jiang-Fan Chen and Micaela Morelli Trends in Neurosciences DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2006.09.004 Lipoprotein receptors in Alzheimer's disease Olav M. Andersen and Thomas E. Willnow Trends in Neurosciences DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2006.09.002 Exciting inhibition in psychostimulant addiction Peter W. Kalivas and Xiu-Ti Hu Trends in Neurosciences DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2006.08.008 Assessing sensory function in locomotor systems using neuro-mechanical simulations Keir Pearson, O ¨rjan Ekeberg and Ansgar Bu ¨schges Trends in Neurosciences DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2006.08.007 Did brain-specific genes evolve faster in humans than in chimpanzees? · DOI
  3. Peng Shi, Margaret A. Bakewell and Jianzhi Zhang Trends in Genetics DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2006.09.001 Understanding the molecular causes of Parkinson's disease A. Wood-Kaczmar, S. Gandhi and N.W. Wood Trends in Molecular Medicine DOI:10.1016/j.molmed.2006.09.007 The role of acetylcholine in learning and memory Michael E. Hasselmo Current Opinion in Neurobiology DOI:10.1016/j.conb.2006.09.002 Essential and expendable features of the circadian timekeeping mechanism Paul E. Hardin Current Opinion in Neurobiology DOI:10.1016/j.conb.2006.09.001 Scanning the human genome for signals of selection Gil McVean and Chris CA Spencer Current Opinion in Genetics and Development DOI:10.1016/j.gde.2006.09.004 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Debener, S., Ullsperger, M., Siegel, M., & Engel, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Royal South Hants Hospital (GB)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
Corresponding author
Debener, Stefan
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-12
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
558-563
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139390557
Cited by
428
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 32
FWCI
1.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
simultaneous EEG-fMRI, single-trial analysis, information processing, spatiotemporal resolution, artificial neural networks
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Electroencephalography, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 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