Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: Reaction time (RT) is a fundamental measure of information processing speed in cognitive neuroscience and is influenced by both structural and functional brain properties. While prior studies have independently linked white matter microstructure and EEG alpha oscillations to cognitive performance, their joint contribution to distinct aspects of RT remains unclear. This study aims to investigate whether multimodal data can dissociate neural systems underlying cognitive and motor components of processing speed. Methods: We analyzed diffusion tensor imaging, resting-state individual EEG alpha peak frequency (IAF), demographic variables, and behavioral RT measures from a GO/NO-GO paradigm in 24 healthy adults from the Cuban Human Brain Mapping Project. Behavioral metrics included the mean, standard deviation and skewness of reaction times for simple and complex tasks. Sparse multiple canonical correlation analysis was applied to identify multivariate associations across modalities. Results: Two significant latent dimensions were identified. The first dimension linked bilateral fronto-temporal association tracts (SLF, IFOF, UNC) with complex RT performance, reflecting higher-order cognitive processing. The second dimension associated motor and interhemispheric tracts (CGC, CST, ILF, forceps major and minor) with intra-individual asymmetric variability (skewness) across tasks, indicating a motor-execution consistency system. IAF did not significantly contribute to either dimension. Sex showed strong associations with both components. Conclusions: Distinct white matter networks were associated with separable cognitive and motor aspects of processing speed, while resting-state alpha frequency did not show stable contributions with behavioral variability in this sample. IAF showed minimal contribution within the identified sparse multivariate dimensions. These findings highlight the importance of multimodal and multivariate approaches for understanding and potentially disentangling complex brain–behavior relationships.
Yasir et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: