INTRODUCTION: Investigating how the brain adapts to increased mental workload through large-scale functional reorganization appears as an important research question. Functional connectivity (FC) aims at capturing how disparate regions of the brain dynamically interact, while graph theory provides tools for the topological characterization of the reconstructed functional networks. Although numerous studies investigated how FC is altered in response to increased working memory (WM) demand, current results are still contradictory as few studies confirmed the robustness of these findings in a low-density setting. METHODS: In this study, we utilized the n-back WM paradigm, in which subjects were presented stimuli (single digits) sequentially, and their task was to decide for each given stimulus if it matched the one presented n-times earlier. Electroencephalography recordings were performed under a control (0-back) and two task conditions of varying difficulty (2- and 3-back). We captured the characteristic connectivity patterns for each difficulty level by performing FC analysis and described the reconstructed functional networks with various graph theoretical measures. RESULTS: We found a substantial decrease in FC when transitioning from the 0- to the 2- or 3-back conditions, however, no differences relating to task difficulty were identified. The observed changes in brain network topology could be attributed to the dissociation of two (frontal and occipitotemporal) functional modules that were only present during the control condition. Furthermore, behavioral and performance measures showed both positive and negative correlations to connectivity indices, although only in the higher frequency bands. CONCLUSION: The marked decrease in FC may be due to temporarily abandoned connections that are redundant or irrelevant in solving the specific task. Our results indicate that FC analysis is a robust tool for investigating the response of the brain to increased cognitive workload.
INTRODUCTION: Investigating how the brain adapts to increased mental workload through large-scale functional reorganization appears as an important research question. Functional connectivity (FC) aims at capturing how disparate regions of the brain dynamically interact, while graph theory provides tools for the topological characterization of the reconstructed functional networks. Although numerous studies investigated how FC is altered in response to increased working memory (WM) demand, current results are still contradictory as few studies confirmed the robustness of these findings in a low-density setting. METHODS: In this study, we utilized the n-back WM paradigm, in which subjects were presented stimuli (single digits) sequentially, and their task was to decide for each given stimulus if it matched the one presented n-times earlier. Electroencephalography recordings were performed under a control (0-back) and two task conditions of varying difficulty (2- and 3-back). We captured the characteristic connectivity patterns for each difficulty level by performing FC analysis and described the reconstructed functional networks with various graph theoretical measures. RESULTS: We found a substantial decrease in FC when transitioning from the 0- to the 2- or 3-back conditions, however, no differences relating to task difficulty were identified. The observed changes in brain network topology could be attributed to the dissociation of two (frontal and occipitotemporal) functional modules that were only present during the control condition. Furthermore, behavioral and performance measures showed both positive and negative correlations to connectivity indices, although only in the higher frequency bands. CONCLUSION: The marked decrease in FC may be due to temporarily abandoned connections that are redundant or irrelevant in solving the specific task. Our results indicate that FC analysis is a robust tool for investigating the response of the brain to increased cognitive workload.
Authors: Michael D Fox; Abraham Z Snyder; Justin L Vincent; Maurizio Corbetta; David C Van Essen; Marcus E Raichle Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-06-23 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: R L Buckner; P A Bandettini; K M O'Craven; R L Savoy; S E Petersen; M E Raichle; B R Rosen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1996-12-10 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Unal Sakoğlu; Godfrey D Pearlson; Kent A Kiehl; Y Michelle Wang; Andrew M Michael; Vince D Calhoun Journal: MAGMA Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Martin Hardmeier; Florian Hatz; Habib Bousleiman; Christian Schindler; Cornelis Jan Stam; Peter Fuhr Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-06 Impact factor: 3.240