The Cognitive Neuroscience Journal

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Perspective - The Cognitive Neuroscience Journal (2022) Volume 5, Issue 2

A brief summary of the brain-behavior connection in clinical neuroscience

Roger Ambroze*

Department of Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Szczecin, Poland

Corresponding Author:
Roger Ambroze
Department of Neurobehavioral Sciences
University of Szczecin, Poland

Received: 02-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. AACNJ-22-108; Editor assigned: 04-Apr-2022, PreQC No. AACNJ-22-108(PQ); Reviewed: 18-Apr-2022, QC No. AACNJ-22-108; Revised: 21-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. AACNJ-22-108(R); Published: 28-Apr-2022, DOI: 10.35841/aacnj-5.2.108

Citation: Ambroze R. A brief summary of the brain-behavior connection in clinical neuroscience.. Cogn Neurosci J. 2022;5(2):108.

Visit for more related articles at The Cognitive Neuroscience Journal


In recent years, there has been an increase in applications of network science in many different fields. In clinical neuroscience and psychopathology, the developments and applications of network science have occurred mostly simultaneously, but without much collaboration between the two fields. The promise of integrating these network applications lies in a united framework to tackle one of the fundamental questions of our time: how to understand the link between brain and behavior. In the current overview, we bridge this gap by introducing conventions in both fields, highlighting similarities, and creating a common language that enables the exploitation of synergies. As it accurately represents research lines in both network neuroscience and psychological networks. We integrate brain and behavior not only semantically, but also practically, by showcasing three methodological avenues that allow combining networks of brain and behavioral data. As such, the current paper offers a stepping stone to further develop multimodal networks and to integrate brain and behaviour.


Behavior, Network science, Psychopathology, Clinical neuroscience.


If one had to put in writing a one-sentence outline of a century of analysis into human behavior and therefore the processes that underlie it, an honest candidate would be: “it’s complicated”. Indeed, the complexities encountered at each level of research, from the neural underpinnings of psychological feature and emotional processes to the intricacies of behavior itself, square measure astounding and that we square measure simply starting to understand the magnitude of the enterprise that (neuro) scientific discipline has ventured on.

In the past years, however, we've got seen a motivating twist: rather than sorrowful quality as a haul, novel methodologies have leveraged quality as strength, and have delivered to bear novel insights from the world of network science to shed light-weight on the subject [1]. Two such square measures are neurobiology, wherever network analysis has become a standard method of considering the brain, and psychopathology, wherever the interactions between symptoms square measure reconceptualised as network structures. However ought to we tend to connect such totally different levels of analysis? Connections between neurons in our brain, interactions between psychological states, and social relations we tend to have interaction altogether kind networks, however ought to we tend to ideate the relations between networks that exist at such totally different levels? This question needs the event of methodologies suited to link network analyses dead at distinct levels of research.

Neuroscience could be a comparatively young field of science, stemming from a fusion between physiology, anatomy, biology, organic process biology, cytology, mathematical modeling, and scientific discipline. One goal of neurobiology is to grasp however brain options relate to human behavior. Throughout the history of neurobiology and its preceding scientific disciplines, two ostensibly opposing views will simply be distinguished, alternating because the ruling school of thought specially periods of history. Macro-scale brain networks (which square measure the foremost typically explored variety of brain networks in living humans) is created in many ways in which supported totally different knowledge modalities. The nodes in such a network usually represent voxels or larger brain areas from Associate in nursing atlas [2].

A case in purpose for the applying of a network neurobiology perspective is analysis on the neural basis of syndrome spectrum disorder (ASD). ASD could be an advanced disorder characterised by difficulties with social interaction and communication aboard restricted interests, repetitive behaviors, and sensory hyper- or hypo-sensitivities. Reminiscent of the strain between localized and holistic theories of data process within the human brain, the history of psychopathology analysis is characterised by an analogous tension between theory and holistic approaches. To keep with the first presentation of psychopathology as a medical discipline, mental disorders square measure typically delineated in terms of an illness analogy [3].

A psychological network, like brain networks, accommodates nodes and links among them. In psychopathology networks, the nodes usually represent symptoms that may be assessed victimisation self-report questionnaires or diagnostic interviews. It’s vital to notice that the nodes during a psychopathology network therefore don't mirror any fastened set of symptoms or any physically localized entities; nodes represent variables, not things. While the fields of network neurobiology and network psychological science square measure chop-chop developing, their natural action is insulating material behind. This can be hanging, as several of the polar queries that square measure being investigated square measure pretty much alike. This is still for technique development and statistics in addition as for the substantive queries [4].

The ensuing multilayer network is also a start line to explore brain-behavior relationships during a new method. For example, one could extract cross-level communities employing a structure agglomeration algorithmic program. Communities’ square measure clusters of nodes that share a lot of links with one another than with nodes outside these clusters. These communities will highlight vital connections within the network, thereby supporting previous results or nonetheless undiscovered findings. The most advantage of victimisation the multilayer approach is that layer-specific network data is unbroken and enclosed within the calculation of relevant measures [5].


We have set out the parallel development and incorporation of networks and quality theory in neurobiology on the one hand, and in scientific discipline on the opposite. As these fields have quickly evolved, each methodologically and conceptually within the past decades, now's the time to take a position into merging these insights and develop a brain-behavior network methodology to answer new queries. Returning to our main example of ASD as a brain and symptom network disorder underlines the promise that multi-level analysis could boost current level-specific insights in terms of etiology, symptomatology and doubtless treatment of this disorder.

A first multi-level study on ASD, victimization one in all the method avenues from this paper, indicates that the (known) overlap between communication and social difficulties within the symptom network isn't mirrored within the overlap between their purposeful brain correlates. Data on the structure organization of symptoms and brain networks could so impact treatment ways. Treatment of medical specialty disorders could also be optimized by higher understanding the link between brain and behavior.


  1. Rossini PM, Rossini L, Ferreri F. Brain-behavior relations: Transcranial magnetic stimulation: A review. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 2010;29(1):84-96.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Anyaeji CI, Cabral J, Silbersweig D. On a quantitative approach to clinical neuroscience in psychiatry: Lessons from the kuramoto model. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2021;29(4):318-26.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Shen X, Finn ES, Scheinost D, et al. Using connectome-based predictive modeling to predict individual behavior from brain connectivity. Nat Protoc. 2017;12(3):506-518.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Nelson CA, Bloom FE, Cameron JL, et al. An integrative, multidisciplinary approach to the study of brain-behavior relations in the context of typical and atypical development. Dev Psychopathol. 2002;14(3):499-520.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Edison P. Brain Connectivity: A Journal of Clinical Neurology and Neuroscience. Brain Connect. 2022;12(2):109-11.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App