The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Tutorial Review of Functional Connectivity Analysis Methods and Their Interpretational Pitfalls
Open accessAbstract
Oscillatory neuronal activity may provide a mechanism for dynamic network coordination. Rhythmic neuronal interactions can be quantified using multiple metrics, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. This tutorial will review and summarize current analysis methods used in the field of invasive and non-invasive electrophysiology to study the dynamic connections between neuronal populations. First, we review metrics for functional connectivity, including coherence, phase synchronization, phase-slope index, and Granger causality, with the specific aim to provide an intuition for how these metrics work, as well as their quantitative definition. Next, we highlight a number of interpretational caveats and common pitfalls that can arise when performing functional connectivity analysis, including the common reference problem, the signal to noise ratio problem, the volume conduction problem, the common input problem, and the sample size bias problem. These pitfalls will be illustrated by presenting a set of MATLAB-scripts, which can be executed by the reader to simulate each of these potential problems. We discuss how these issues can be addressed using current methods.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods
Granger, C. W. J. (1969) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912791 · Cited by 22,989
Oostenveld, R., Fries, P., Maris, E., & Schoffelen, J.-M. (2011) · Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience · doi:10.1155/2011/156869 · Cited by 10,323
Self-citationThe brainweb: phase synchronization and large-scale integration
Varela, F., Lachaux, J.-P., Rodriguez, E., & Martinerie, J. (2001) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/35067550 · Cited by 4,761
Measuring Information Transfer
Schreiber, T. (2000) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.85.461 · Cited by 4,530
A mechanism for cognitive dynamics: neuronal communication through neuronal coherence.
Fries, P. (2005) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.011 · Cited by 4,284
Measuring phase synchrony in brain signals
Lachaux, J.-P., Rodriguez, E., Martinerie, J., & Varela, F. J. (1999) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0193(1999)8:4<194::aid-hbm4>3.0.co;2-c · Cited by 3,798
Kraskov, A., Stögbauer, H., & Grassberger, P. (2004) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.69.066138 · Cited by 3,512
Mechanisms of Gamma Oscillations
Buzsáki, G., & Wang, X.-J. (2012) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-062111-150444 · Cited by 2,796
Modulation of Oscillatory Neuronal Synchronization by Selective Visual Attention
Fries, P., Reynolds, J. H., Rorie, A. E., & Desimone, R. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1055465 · Cited by 2,786
Rhythms for cognition: communication through coherence
Fries, P. (2015) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.09.034 · Cited by 2,725
Cited by
Communication dynamics in complex brain networks
Avena-Koenigsberger, A., Misic, B., & Sporns, O. (2018) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn.2017.149 · Cited by 856
Pathophysiological mechanisms implicated in postpartum depression
Payne, J. L., & Maguire, J. (2019) · Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2018.12.001 · Cited by 459
Layer and rhythm specificity for predictive routing
Bastos, A. M., Lundqvist, M., Waite, A. S., Kopell, N., & Miller, E. K. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2014868117 · Cited by 268
“In addition, bipolar derivation enhances the spatial localization of LFP signals and removes the common reference and any common noise or volume conduction in the signal (75).”
Self-citationEvolving perspectives on the sources of the frequency-following response
Coffey, E. B. J., Nicol, T., White-Schwoch, T., Chandrasekaran, B., Krizman, J., Skoe, E., Zatorre, R. J., & Kraus, N. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13003-w · Cited by 207
Stomach-brain synchrony reveals a novel, delayed-connectivity resting-state network in humans
Rebollo, I., Devauchelle, A.-D., Béranger, B., & Tallon-Baudry, C. (2018) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.33321 · Cited by 194
“Note that PLV is a measure that depends on sample size (Vinck et al., 2010; Bastos and Schoffelen, 2015).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Bastos, A. M., & Schoffelen, J.-M.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2016-01-08
- Volume
- 9
- Pages
- 175-175
- ISSN
- 1662-5137 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2227520796
- Cited by
- 1,313
- References
- 88
- FWCI
- 59.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Tutorial Review of Functional Connectivity Analysis Methods and Their Interpretational Pitfalls. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fnsys.2015.00175
- The paper
- Bastos, A. M., & Schoffelen, J.-M. (2016). A Tutorial Review of Functional Connectivity Analysis Methods and Their Interpretational Pitfalls. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2015.00175
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
