Cited by 159Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications

Functional segregation of the human dorsomedial prefrontal cortex

Open access
Eickhoff, Simon B., Laird, Angela R., Fox, Peter T., Bzdok, Danilo, Hensel, Lukas·2016·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

The human dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) has been implicated in various complex cognitive processes, including social cognition. To unravel its functional organization, we assessed the dmPFC's regional heterogeneity, connectivity patterns, and functional profiles. First, the heterogeneity of a dmPFC seed, engaged during social processing, was investigated by assessing local differences in whole-brain coactivation profiles. Second, functional connectivity of the ensuing dmPFC clusters was compared by task-constrained meta-analytic coactivation mapping and task-unconstrained resting-state correlations. Third, dmPFC clusters were functionally profiled by forward/reverse inference. The dmPFC seed was thus segregated into 4 clusters (rostroventral, rostrodorsal, caudal-right, and caudal-left). Both rostral clusters were connected to the amygdala and hippocampus and associated with memory and social cognitive tasks in functional decoding. The rostroventral cluster exhibited strongest connectivity to the default mode network. Unlike the rostral segregation, the caudal dmPFC was divided by hemispheres. The caudal-right cluster was strongly connected to a frontoparietal network (dorsal attention network), whereas the caudal-left cluster was strongly connected to the anterior midcingulate cortex and bilateral anterior insula (salience network). In conclusion, we demonstrate that a dmPFC seed reflecting social processing can be divided into 4 separate functional modules that contribute to distinct facets of advanced human cognition.

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 · 10.1093/cercor/bhu250

Cites

155 of 155 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?

  • Dorsomedial PFC supports social cognition, mental state inference, and social judgments as well as performance monitoring.

    “in addition to performance monitoring, dorsomedial PFC is involved in social cognition, mental state inference, and social judgments (Eickhoff et al., 2016).”
  • The anterior insula and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex have known roles in threat processing and anxiety and are prominent salience-network members; they likely interact with the BNST to express an aversive emotional state during threat anticipation.

    “The anterior insula and dorsomedial PFC have known functional roles in threat processing and anxiety responses and are prominent members of the neural salience network (Downar et al, 2002;Eickhoff et al, 2014); these regions likely interact with the BNST to express an aversive emotional state during anticipation of threat”

    From The human BNST: functional role in anxiety and addiction (2016) · cites this paper as Eickhoff et al, 2014

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

1 of the 156 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eickhoff, S. B., Laird, A. R., Fox, P. T., Bzdok, D., & Hensel, L.
Affiliations
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • Florida International University (US)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2014-10-20
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
304-321
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2077842462
Cited by
159
References
156
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • JuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich) (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (, EI 816/6-1, 816/4-1, DFG, EI 816/4–1, 3071/3-1, EI 816/4–1)
  • Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH074457, EI 816/6-, MH074457)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, functional segregation, regional heterogeneity, social cognition, functional connectivity, default mode network, dorsal attention network, salience network, amygdala, hippocampus, memory, hemispheric lateralization
MeSH terms
Attention, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cognition, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Memory, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Rest, Social Behavior, Prefrontal Cortex

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