Neural correlates of attentional expertise in long-term meditation practitioners

*W.M. Keck Laboratory for Functional Brain Imaging and Behavior, Medical College of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53226;
^†Department of Radiology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506; and
^‡Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904

Edited by Edward E. Smith, Columbia University, New York, NY, and approved May 29, 2007 (received for review August 3, 2006)

View larger version:
- In this window
- In a new window
- Download as PowerPoint Slide
Fig. 1.
Meditation block data. Activation in concentration meditation block (Med.) vs. resting state block (Rest) for 12 EMs (A), 12 age-matched NMs (B), and t test subtraction of EMs (C) (red hues reflect greater activation in EMs vs. NMs) vs. regular NMs (blue hues reflect greater activation in NMs vs. EMs). Alpha maps ranging from P < 0.001 (orange, positive activation; medium blue, negative activation) to P < 0.01 (orange/medium blue) to P < 0.05, corrected (red, positive activation; dark blue, negative activation) are overlaid on inflated population-average, landmark- and surface-based atlas cortical model brains and an axial slice at z = 11 to show midbrain regions. ‡, smaller than corrected for multiple comparisons. (D) Activation in attention-shifting metaanalysis ROIs. Color scale is the same for all panels (see key). (E) Response over time (seconds) for left DLPFC. Start of the meditation block is indicated by an orange line at 80 sec. Standard error bars are shown for every 10 sec. (F) Bar graphs for amplitude of activation in DLPFC in the “early” part of the meditation block (the first 10 sec, excluding the first 2 sec because of hemodynamic delay) and the “late” part of the meditation block (120 sec to 200 sec).
View larger version:
- In this window
- In a new window
- Download as PowerPoint Slide
Fig. 2.
Expertise-related differences in response to distractor sounds. (A) State (all sounds in Med. vs. Rest) by group (EM vs. INM) ANOVA results (left) showing cluster in P. Cing that is more active for the INMs. (B) Voxel-wise regression of sounds in Med. with hours of practice in the EMs showing negative (blue) correlation and positive (orange) correlation (P < 0.02 uncorrected). (C) Example of negative correlation in right P. Cing. (D) State by group ANOVA for negative sounds showing small focus of greater activation in Amyg in INMs vs. EMs. (E) Voxel-wise regression of response to negative sounds in Med. with hours in EMs showing bilateral Amyg (P < 0.02 uncorrected). (F) Correlation within EMs in right Amyg ROI. One outlier (orange) was not included in correlation.

Footnotes

^§To whom correspondence should be addressed at:
W. M. Keck Laboratory for Functional Brain Imaging and Behavior, Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin, 1500 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705.
E-mail: rjdavids{at}wisc.edu