Cited by 95Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Down-regulation of amygdala activation with real-time fMRI neurofeedback in a healthy female sample

Open access
Paret, Christian, Kluetsch, Rosemarie, Ruf, Matthias, Demirakca, Traute, Hoesterey, Steffen, Ende, Gabriele, Schmahl, Christian·2014·Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Psychiatric conditions of emotion dysregulation are often characterized by difficulties in regulating the activity of limbic regions such as the amygdala. Real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (rt-fMRI) allows to feedback brain activation and opens the possibility to establish a neurofeedback (NF) training of amygdala activation, e.g., for subjects suffering from emotion dysregulation. As a first step, we investigated whether feedback of the amygdala response to aversive scenes can improve down-regulation of amygdala activation. One group of healthy female participants received amygdala feedback (N = 16) and a control group was presented with feedback from a control region located in the basal ganglia [N(sum) = 32]. Subjects completed a one-session rt-fMRI-NF training where they viewed aversive pictures and received continuous visual feedback on brain activation (REGULATE condition). In a control condition, subjects were advised to respond naturally to aversive pictures (VIEW), and a neutral condition served as the non-affective control (NEUTRAL). In an adjacent run, subjects were presented with aversive pictures without feedback to test for transfer effects of learning. In a region of interest (ROI) analysis, the VIEW and the REGULATE conditions were contrasted to estimate brain regulation success. The ROI analysis was complemented by an exploratory analysis of activations at the whole-brain level. Both groups showed down-regulation of the amygdala response during training. Feedback from the amygdala but not from the control region was associated with down-regulation of the right amygdala in the transfer test. The whole-brain analysis did not detect significant group interactions. Results of the group whole-brain analyses are discussed. We present a proof-of-concept study using rt-fMRI-NF for amygdala down-regulation in the presence of aversive scenes. Results are in line with a potential benefit of NF training for amygdala regulation.

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 · 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00299

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?

  • A combined anatomical and functional approach for defining a target region is commonly implemented in rt-fMRI NF studies focusing on emotion regulation.

    “A combined anatomical and functional approach for defining a target region is commonly implemented in rt-fMRI NF studies focusing on emotion regulation (Nicholson et al., 2017, Paret et al., 2014, Paret et al., 2016).”

    From Rt-fMRI neurofeedback-guided cognitive reappraisal training modulates amygdala responsivity in posttraumatic stress disorder (2020) · cites this paper as Paret et al., 2014

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says the study combined anatomical delineation of the bilateral amygdala with functional voxel selection. The Methods describe both steps for its neurofeedback target. This supports the paper as an example of the approach, but it does not establish that the approach is commonly implemented across emotion-regulation rt-fMRI neurofeedback studies. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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 61 · Cited by 95

Authors
Paret, C., Kluetsch, R., Ruf, M., Demirakca, T., Hoesterey, S., Ende, G., & Schmahl, C.
Affiliations
Heidelberg University (DE)
Corresponding author
Paret, Christian
Venue
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2014-09-18
Volume
8
Pages
299-299
ISSN
1662-5153 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2128019149
Cited by
95
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 6
FWCI
4.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EN 361/13-1, SCHM 1526/14-1, /14-1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
real-time fMRI neurofeedback, emotional dysregulation, limbic system, transfer of learning, right amygdala, emotion regulation training

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