J Physiol Society Membership
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Physiol Volume 579, Number 3, 571-579, March 15, 2007 DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.127142
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
579/3/571    most recent
jphysiol.2006.127142v1
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fetz, E. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fetz, E. E.
Related Collections
Right arrow Review articles

SYMPOSIUM REPORT

Volitional control of neural activity: implications for brain–computer interfaces

Eberhard E. Fetz1

1 Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Washington National Primate Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-7290, USA

Successful operation of brain–computer interfaces (BCI) and brain–machine interfaces (BMI) depends significantly on the degree to which neural activity can be volitionally controlled. This paper reviews evidence for such volitional control in a variety of neural signals, with particular emphasis on the activity of cortical neurons. Some evidence comes from conventional experiments that reveal volitional modulation in neural activity related to behaviours, including real and imagined movements, cognitive imagery and shifts of attention. More direct evidence comes from studies on operant conditioning of neural activity using biofeedback, and from BCI/BMI studies in which neural activity controls cursors or peripheral devices. Limits in the degree of accuracy of control in the latter studies can be attributed to several possible factors. Some of these factors, particularly limited practice time, can be addressed with long-term implanted BCIs. Preliminary observations with implanted circuits implementing recurrent BCIs are summarized.

(Received 20 December 2006; accepted after revision 11 January 2007; first published online 18 January 2007)
Corresponding author E. E. Fetz: Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Washington National Primate Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-7290, USA.  Email: fetz{at}u.washington.edu


This report was presented at The Journal of Physiology Symposium on Physiology of brain–computer interfaces, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 13 October 2006. It was commissioned by the Editorial Board and reflects the views of the authors.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
S. M. Radhakrishnan, S. N. Baker, and A. Jackson
Learning a Novel Myoelectric-Controlled Interface Task
J Neurophysiol, October 1, 2008; 100(4): 2397 - 2408.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Physiol.Home page
L. G. Cohen and N. Birbaumer
The physiology of brain-computer interfaces
J. Physiol., March 15, 2007; 579(3): 570 - 570.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 The Physiological Society.