Catching the Brain at Work

Scientists found a way to detect the order of activity in two regions of the brain using fMRI. And they found that the brain can register something as highly emotional before it actually processes what that something is. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

It’s called functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI. And some neuroscientists call it the greatest scientific advance of the last 25 years.  Because fMRI lets researchers look at the human brain in action.  By measuring blood flow, it produces colorful maps of the brain that display the actual activity of neurons—the brain at work. 

Sounds great, right? Well, there are criticisms. One is that it’s slow. The blood flow response can take two to five seconds, but a thought can flash in milliseconds.

Well a study published in the Journal of Neuroscience found a way to get around this time lag in order to study the timing of activation in two related, but separate, regions of the brain.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Scientists predicted that viewing an emotionally charged photo would get the attention of the viewer’s amygdala (the fight-or-flight area of the brain) even before part of the brain’s visual system got activated. If that happened, it would mean that we process an image as scary before we even register what it is.

But to test timing of activation between two brain regions requires a fast measurement tool, and an fMRI scan is too slow to see if there’s any difference in timing between when the amygdala cells fire versus when the visual cortex cells fire.

So instead of doing a whole brain scan, which is standard for fMRI studies, the researchers scanned a tiny five millimeters part of the brain that included a sampling of the pertinent regions. By limiting the imaging to this small slice they were able to get 10 scans per second instead of one scan every two to three seconds. So if there was a short lag between regions in the brain they could catch it.

They showed participants positive images (e.g., erotic) and negative (e.g., torture), as well as a neutral image.

And results were in line with their prediction:  the emotional pics activated the amygdala well before part of the visual cortex.

So while there is still a permanent issue with timing and fMRI—because the blood flow response arrives about five seconds after brain cells fire—these researchers show that it’s possible to measure the relative difference between activation times in two brain regions. 

It might seem creepy that our brain can tell us to run before we fully visually identifiedexactly what we are running from—but I think we agree, it’s a good thing.

—Christie Nicholson

Thanks to the blog Neuroskeptic for noting this piece of research.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe