Talk:Issues in fMRI

=Citations too old= The citations here are from late 1990s, early 2000s when fMRI was in its early stages and issues were being discovered. Today, the claims made in fMRI papers are qualified and restricted by some of the issues mentioned in those citations. Not sure why this is worth an article. Some shortcomings have been overcome via multi voxel analysis (multivariate analysis) instead of analyzing each voxel independently. Some others with better experimental techniques. This article should not be merged before it is cleaned up here. Ajoykt (talk) 05:44, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The Poldrack (2008) article from "Current Opinion in Neurobiology"
Here is the entire "Conclusion" section of that article. Note how different the tone is from the selective citations included here:


 * As fMRI has matured as an imaging technology and the body of existing research has grown, it has become increasingly possible to use fMRI data to ‘read’ mental states from brain activity, first informally and increasingly using formal methods from machine learning. I believe that these methods will provide the basis for the next generation of neuroimaging in combination with more detailed models of neural connectivity and computational modeling. There is concern, however, that a failure to appreciate and directly address the ethical implications of this work could lead to a backlash, including regulations that could hobble fMRI research.