Introduction to connectivity: Psychophysiological Interactions Roland Benoit MfD 2007/8.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Experimental Design Sara Bengtsson With thanks to: Christian Ruff
Advertisements

Experimental Design Sara Bengtsson With thanks to: Christian Ruff
Experimental Design Christian Ruff With thanks to: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser Christian Ruff With thanks to: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser.
Experimental Design Christian Ruff With slides from: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser Christian Ruff With slides from: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser.
1 st Level Analysis: design matrix, contrasts, GLM Clare Palmer & Misun Kim Methods for Dummies
Introduction to Connectivity: PPI and SEM Methods for Dummies 2011/12 Emma Jayne Kilford & Peter Smittenaar.
Introduction to Connectivity: PPI and SEM Carmen Tur Maria Joao Rosa Methods for Dummies 2009/10 24 th February, UCL, London.
Outline What is ‘1st level analysis’? The Design matrix
Models of Effective Connectivity & Dynamic Causal Modelling
Experimental design of fMRI studies Methods & models for fMRI data analysis in neuroeconomics November 2010 Klaas Enno Stephan Laboratory for Social and.
Introduction to Connectivity: resting-state and PPI
Hanneke den Ouden Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College London, UK Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen,
Experimental Design Christian Ruff With thanks to: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser Christian Ruff With thanks to: Rik Henson Daniel Glaser.
The functional connectivity of cortical areas Or how to produce many numbers.
DCM for fMRI: Theory & Practice
Experimental design of fMRI studies Methods & models for fMRI data analysis 12 November 2008 Klaas Enno Stephan Laboratory for Social and Neural Systems.
Structural Equation Modeling
Functional Connectivity: PPI and beta Series
Lorelei Howard and Nick Wright MfD 2008
Christian Ruff Laboratory for Social and Neural Systems Research Department of Economics University of Zurich Institute of Neurology University College.
Rosalyn Moran Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging Institute of Neurology University College London With thanks to the FIL Methods Group for slides and.
1st Level Analysis Design Matrix, Contrasts & Inference
GUIDE to The… D U M M I E S’ DCM Velia Cardin. Functional Specialization is a question of Where? Where in the brain is a certain cognitive/perceptual.
The General Linear Model
Dynamic Causal Modelling THEORY SPM Course FIL, London October 2009 Hanneke den Ouden Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging Radboud University.
From Localization to Connectivity and... Lei Sheu 1/11/2011.
Dynamic Causal Modelling
Measuring Functional Integration: Connectivity Analyses
Chapter 11: Cognition and neuroanatomy. Three general questions 1.How is the brain anatomically organized? 2.How is the mind functionally organized? 3.How.
With many thanks for slides & images to: FIL Methods group, Virginia Flanagin and Klaas Enno Stephan Dr. Frederike Petzschner Translational Neuromodeling.
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory Demis Hassabis & Hanneke den Ouden Thanks to Klaas Enno Stephan Functional Imaging Lab Wellcome Dept. of Imaging.
Introduction to Connectivity: resting-state and PPI
BCN Neuroimaging Centre University of Groningen The Netherlands PPI Friston (1997) Gitelman (2003)
FMRI Methods Lecture7 – Review: analyses & statistics.
18 th February 2009 Stephanie Burnett Christian Lambert Methods for Dummies 2009 Dynamic Causal Modelling Part I: Theory.
Dynamic Causal Modelling for fMRI Friday 22 nd Oct SPM fMRI course Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging London André Marreiros.
Dynamic Causal Modelling Will Penny Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, University College London, UK FMRIB, Oxford, May
PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING Karine Gazarian and Carmen Tur London, February 11th, 2009 Introduction to connectivity.
Experimental design of fMRI studies Methods & models for fMRI data analysis 01 November 2013 Klaas Enno Stephan Translational Neuromodeling Unit (TNU)
SPM short course Functional integration and connectivity Christian Büchel Karl Friston The Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology, UCL London UK http//:
Experimental design of fMRI studies Methods & models for fMRI data analysis November 2012 Sandra Iglesias Translational Neuromodeling Unit (TNU) Institute.
The world before DCM. Linear regression models of connectivity Structural equation modelling (SEM) y1y1 y3y3 y2y2 b 12 b 32 b 13 z1z1 z2z2 z3z3 0 b 12.
Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston Ch. 5 Bayesian Treatment of Neuroimaging Data Will Penny and Karl Friston 18.
Bayesian inference Lee Harrison York Neuroimaging Centre 23 / 10 / 2009.
Psycho-Physiological Interaction (PPI) May 8, 2013, 1.15 – 2.45 pm bc pw: mpi-brain13.
Bayesian selection of dynamic causal models for fMRI Will Penny Olivier David, Karl Friston, Lee Harrison, Andrea Mechelli, Klaas Stephan The brain as.
Dynamic Causal Modeling (DCM) A Practical Perspective Ollie Hulme Barrie Roulston Zeki lab.
The General Linear Model Guillaume Flandin Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London SPM fMRI Course London, October 2012.
5th March 2008 Andreina Mendez Stephanie Burnett
Effective Connectivity: Basics
Design Matrix, General Linear Modelling, Contrasts and Inference
Effective Connectivity
Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM): Theory
Experimental Design in Functional Neuroimaging
The General Linear Model
Dynamic Causal Modelling
Experimental Design Christian Ruff With thanks to: Rik Henson
Zillah Boraston and Disa Sauter 31st May 2006
Introduction to Connectivity Analyses
DCM - the practical bits
Dynamic Causal Modelling
The General Linear Model
CRIS Workshop: Computational Neuroscience and Bayesian Modelling
Effective Connectivity
M/EEG Statistical Analysis & Source Localization
MfD 04/12/18 Alice Accorroni – Elena Amoruso
The General Linear Model
Experimental Design Christian Ruff With slides from: Rik Henson
The General Linear Model
Group DCM analysis for cognitive & clinical studies
Presentation transcript:

Introduction to connectivity: Psychophysiological Interactions Roland Benoit MfD 2007/8

Functional Integration Functional Segregation Effective ConnectivityFunctional Connectivity

Attention V1 V5 An Example

Set source target stimuli source target Two Interpretations Context-sensitive connectivityModulation of stimulus-specific responses

How it works: Interactions V1 X Attention

How it works: GLM V1 Att V1XAtt z = -9 mm

How it works: Deconvolution y = V1*b1 + Att*b2 + (V1xAtt)*b3 + ec = [0 0 1]  V1) X  Att) ≠ HRF (V1 X Att) (HRF  V1) X (HRF  Att) ≠ HRF (V1 X Att) Deconvolve physiological regressor (V1) Calculate interaction term (V1xAtt) Convolve interaction term

How it is done: PPI & SPM5 Estimate GLM Extract time series at Region of Interest

How it is done: PPI & SPM5 3.Deconvolve, Calculate Interaction, Reconvolve

How it is done: PPI & SPM5 3.Estimate new GLM

Acknowledgements Data from –C. Buchel and K. Friston. Modulation of connectivity in visual pathways by attention: Cortical interactions evaluated with structural equation modelling and fMRI, Cerebral Cortex, 7: , 1997 Figures from –K.J. Friston, C. Buchel, G.R. Fink, J. Morris, E. Rolls, and R. Dolan. Psychophysiological and modulatory interactions in Neuroimaging. NeuroImage, 6: , 1997 –Christian Ruff’s ppt “Experimental Design” Tutorial:

Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) Christos Pliatsikas

Differences from PPI Better in identifying causal relationships Based on regression analysis, estimated simultaneously as an interlocked system of relationships Looks at covariances in activity between different brain areas Combines these data with anatomical models of brain areas connections Connectivity can be compared over time or across conditions

SEM comprises a set of regions and a set of directed connections These connections are presumed to represent causal relationships A priori assumption of causality, without inference from the data AB (causes)

This approach offers a move from correlational analysis (inherently bi- directional) to uni-directional connections (‘paths’) which imply causality a1a2 = a 21 a1a3 = a 21 x a 32 a1a4 = a 21 x a 32 x a 43 a2a3 = a 32 x a 23 a2a4 = a 32 x a 43 a3a4 = a 43 a2 a1a4 a3 a 21 a 23 a 32 a 43

For SEM we need… –An anatomical model, consisting of specified regions and interconnections –A functional model, through a correlation matrix that generates the path strengths

Particular connection strengths in an SEM presuppose a set of instantaneous correlations among regions Connection strengths can be set to minimise discrepancy between the observed and the implied correlations.

Steps in SEM 1.Select regions of interest 2.Build a model about how the regions are connected to each other 3.See what patterns of covariance the model predicts 4.Compare them to the observed patterns 5.“Goodness of fit” model: difference between predicted and observed patterns

Different model approaches We look at how effective connectivity is affected by a variable (eg attention) We observe patterns of covariance under 2 conditions (attention vs non attention) 2 models applied to the data: –Null model: estimates of the free parameters are constrained to be the same for both groups –Alternative model: estimates of the free parameters are allowed to differ between groups We check at “goodness of fit” of both models The model that has better fit determines whether connectivity is different across the 2 conditions

SEM: pros and cons Looks at influence of several brain areas simultaneously-more complete model Based on assumptions backed by neuroanatomy Lack of temporal information Causality is predetermined, and this might overlook several aspects of neural activity

Further reading… Jezzard et al (eds)(2001): Functional MRI. An introduction to methods Penny et al (2004): Modelling functional Integration www- bmu.psychiatry.cam.ac.uk/PUBLICATION_STOR E/talks/fletcher03fun.pps PPI%20&%20SEM.ppt

Thank you!