Self-Directed Neuroplasticity

Graphical abstract

1. Introduction

Neuroplasticity, or brain plasticity, refers to the brain’s ability to change, adapt, and reorganize itself by forming new neural connections throughout life. Several key factors contribute to neuroplasticity, including genetics, learning, training, and environmental changes. Experience-dependent neuroplasticity (EDN) represents the influence of a person’s life experiences (e.g., culture, learning, adversity, drugs) on brain development and reorganization [1]. In the London taxi driver study, compared to non-taxi-driver controls, the taxi drivers who mastered the city’s streets showed increased grey matter volume in the posterior hippocampus, a region crucial for spatial memory. The longer an individual had been driving taxis, the larger their posterior hippocampus [2]. However, daily experiences are often not self-motivated and are driven by external demands and tasks such as repeated environmental stimuli. Therefore, we propose self-directed neuroplasticity to consciously shape our brain’s structure and function,and effectively change habits and behaviors.

Self-directed neuroplasticity (SDN) refers to the modulation and reorganization of the brain’s plasticity through effortful and effortless self-control processes using self-initiated, tailored experiences (e.g., training) to induce brain functional and structural changes [1]. Compared to EDN which is closely linked to task-positive networks (e.g., sensory, motor), SDN engages down-regulation of default mode networks and up-regulation of self-control and task-positive networks [1]. There are two types of training methods—Network training and State training, which contribute to self-neuroplasticity [3]. In this review, we consider two widely used methods—working memory training and mindfulness training to demonstrate the similarities and differences between network and state training on brain plasticity.

2. Network Training and Brain Plasticity

Cognitive training has now become popular to improve cognitive function and prevent cognitive decline. It uses a set of structured, targeted activities designed to improve specific cognitive functions such as working memory and attention [4]. Network training often uses computerized programs (e.g., attention or working memory training) and involves task repetitions with increasingly demanding levels of task difficulty and effort. Network training requires narrow focus and task-specific learning and exercise. Therefore, it engages specific brain networks related to selected cognitive processes.

Working memory is the capacity to hold and manipulate information while resisting distractions. Working memory training (WMT) targets the temporary storage of a few items, either recently presented or retrieved from memory. Therefore, it specifically targets the structure of the task (like n-back working memory) and does not generalize beyond that task. The meta-analyses of WMT have shown significant near transfer in working memory but little to no far transfer to general intelligence, and academic skills [5, 6]. Several factors may contribute to limited far transfer including lack of overlap in core cognitive processes, not targeting executive functions, and lack of motivation and engagement. Thus, training-induced neuroplasticity tends to be task-specific (e.g., stronger activation in the frontoparietal areas related to the task), rather than broadly restructuring networks involved in other cognitive capacities [1, 3].

Why is frontoparietal plasticity task-specific? One explanation is the context-dependence of synaptic modifications in prefrontal and parietal regions, where long-term potentiation and long-term depression reinforce task-relevant circuits without broad generalizations [7, 8]. Basic mechanisms, such as synaptic pruning and the activity of brain-derived neurotrophic factors, further constrain plasticity to circuits that are repeatedly engaged [9]. Thus, while frontoparietal plasticity supports task performance, its specificity limits generalization beyond the trained task. These findings suggest that brain plasticity is localized following WMT [1, 3, 5, 6].

3. State Training and Brain Plasticity

In contrast, state training uses practice (e.g., mindfulness meditation, nature exposure) to develop a brain state that may influence the performance of many networks. This state involves networks but is not designed to train networks using a cognitive task. Instead, it changes brain and bodily states (central and autonomic nervous system, CNS and ANS) and engages diverse brain networks such as attention control, emotion regulation, self-awareness, and executive function. It is different from effortful network training, such as WMT, that involves demanding cognitive tasks or processes to achieve benefits [3, 10].

Integrative Body–Mind Training (IBMT), an open-monitoring mindfulness practice, is an example of SDN. IBMT emphasizes effortless awareness of body and mind, accepting whatever arises without trying to control thoughts or feelings. Randomized trials show that brief periods of IBMT enhance attention and self-control, and induce neuroplasticity in the anterior and posterior cingulate cortex (ACC and PCC) and striatum through interaction between CNS and ANS. In addition, IBMT has shown far-transfer effects such as improvements in cognitive performance, academic skills, emotion regulation, executive function, and immune function [1, 10, 11, 12, 13].

Why does IBMT induce neuroplasticity through CNS and ANS interactions? Emerging evidence points to a bidirectional mechanism. IBMT increases parasympathetic activity (e.g., elevated high-frequency heart rate variability), which is associated with improved regulation of emotion and attention control. This heightened vagal tone provides a physiological context that facilitates ACC engagement, thereby modulating its activity [1, 10, 13]. Alternatively, IBMT directly modulates ACC activity and its functional connectivity with broader regulatory networks (e.g., insula, striatum, PCC). These networks are implicated in both cognitive control and autonomic regulation. This form of top-down regulation from the ACC to the ANS suggests a central–autonomic coupling mechanism that may underlie IBMT-induced neuroplasticity. These findings are consistent with previous studies documenting the role of ACC in autonomic regulation across both healthy and pathological populations [10, 13, 14, 15].

4. How to Induce Self-Directed Neuroplasticity Effectively

As shown in Fig. 1, effortful and effortless attention and self-control processes modulate and reorganize brain plasticity using self-initiated, tailored training experiences to induce functional and structural changes in the brain.

Effortful control involves sustained mental effort and control to achieve outcomes and is often supported by the frontoparietal network. Participants often don’t enjoy the training and seldom continue it voluntarily. Therefore, how to engage participants with greater interest and motivation in repetitive tasks is crucial for efficient plasticity [3]. In contrast, effortless control engages minimal effort and autonomic control and is often supported by the ACC, PCC, striatum and parasympathetic nervous system. Participants often enjoy and engage in the training. How to maintain a longitudinal practice voluntarily is important to the plasticity [10].

Effortful control requires narrow focus whereas effortless control engages open focus. When requiring paying attention to an object or a task, we often use narrow focus with a rigid and fixated attention mode to complete the task, which leads to elevated stress and muscle tension in the neck, head and spine. This process triggers effort-based frontoparietal areas and the sympathetic nervous system. When using an open, soft, and flexible attention mode to complete a task, we are in the parasympathetic dominance and engaging the ACC-PCC-striatum network, which is often more efficient and creative. Therefore, effortful control aligns with network training’s narrow focus, while effortless control underlies state training’s open focus. As a result, changing attention habits and balancing narrow and open focus become crucial for effective SDN [1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20].

SDN can be brief and we can use designed experiences (e.g., training format) to modulate and reorganize our own brain function and structure through effortful and effortless attention and self-control processes. How to combine effortful and effortless training, such as in different time course or dose, is imperative for effective SDN and performance.

References

[1] Tang YY, Tang R. Fundamentals of health neuroscience. Academic Press, Elsevier: USA. 2024.

[2] Maguire EA, Gadian DG, Johnsrude IS, Good CD, Ashburner J, Frackowiak RS, et al. Navigation-related structural change in the hippocampi of taxi drivers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2000; 97: 4398–4403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.070039597.

[3] Tang YY, Posner MI. Training brain networks and states. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2014; 18: 345–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.002.

[4] von Bastian CC, Belleville S, Udale RC, Reinhartz A, Essounni M, Strobach T. Mechanisms underlying training-induced cognitive change. Nature Reviews Psychology. 2022; 1: 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00001-3.

[5] Sala G, Gobet F. Cognitive training does not enhance general cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2019; 23: 9–20.

[6] Melby-Lervåg M, Redick TS, Hulme C. Working memory training does not improve performance on measures of intelligence or other measures of “far transfer”: evidence from a meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2016; 11: 512–534

[7] Morrison JH, Baxter MG. The ageing cortical synapse: hallmarks and implications for cognitive decline. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience. 2012; 13: 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3200.

[8] Constantinidis C, Klingberg T. The neuroscience of working memory capacity and training. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience. 2016; 17: 438–449. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.43.

[9] Zatorre RJ, Fields RD, Johansen-Berg H. Plasticity in gray and white: neuroimaging changes in brain structure during learning. Nature Neuroscience. 2012; 15: 528–536. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3045.

[10] Tang YY, Tang R, Posner MI, Gross JJ. Effortless training of attention and self-control: mechanisms and applications. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2022; 26: 567–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2022.04.006.

[11] Tang Y, Tang R. Health Neuroscience-How the Brain/Mind and Body Affect our Health Behavior and Outcomes. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience. 2024; 23: 69. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.jin2304069.

[12] Tang YY, Hölzel BK, Posner MI. The neuroscience of mindfulness meditation. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience. 2015; 16: 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3916.

[13] Tang YY. The Neuroscience of mindfulness meditation: How the body and mind work together to change our behavior? Springer Nature: London. 2017

[14] Critchley HD, Mathias CJ, Josephs O, O’Doherty J, Zanini S, Dewar BK, et al. Human cingulate cortex and autonomic control: converging neuroimaging and clinical evidence. Brain: a Journal of Neurology. 2003; 126: 2139–2152. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awg216.

[15] Gentil AF, Eskandar EN, Marci CD, Evans KC, Dougherty DD. Physiological responses to brain stimulation during limbic surgery: further evidence of anterior cingulate modulation of autonomic arousal. Biological Psychiatry. 2009; 66: 695–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.05.009.

[16] Critchley HD. Neural mechanisms of interoception and emotion. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2005; 7: 536–546.

[17] Draganski B, Gaser C, Busch V, Schuierer G, Bogdahn U, May A. Neuroplasticity: changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature. 2004; 427: 311–312. https://doi.org/10.1038/427311a.

[18] Posner MI, Rothbart MK. Attention, self-regulation and consciousness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 1998; 353: 1915–1927. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1998.0344.

[19] Hölzel BK, Lazar SW, Gard T, Schuman-Olivier Z, Vago DR, Ott U. How Does Mindfulness Meditation Work? Proposing Mechanisms of Action From a Conceptual and Neural Perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science: a Journal of the Association for Psychological Science. 2011; 6: 537–559. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611419671.

[20] Kelly AMC, Garavan H. Human functional neuroimaging of brain changes associated with practice. Cerebral Cortex (New York, N.Y.: 1991). 2005; 15: 1089–1102. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi005.

Funding

Office of Naval Research(N000142412270)

National Institutes of Health(R33AT010138)