Table 1.

Selected studies related to dynamic rsfMRI and healthy cognition. Columns include citation, the method used for calculating changes in the fMRI signal, the task, stimulus or spontaneous condition used in the study, the time scale for comparison between resting and task blocks, and selected observations. (Some studies using BOLD amplitude changes over time are listed as well, as their results are very similar to studies using windowed correlation.)

Citation	Method	Task	Time scale	Selected observations
Weisman et al., 2006	BOLD amplitude	Visual attention	During task	Less deactivation of default region linked to errors
Boly et al., 2007	BOLD amplitude	Somatosensory detection	3 s prestimulus	Increases or decreases (based on region) linked to performance
Eichele et al., 2008	BOLD amplitude	Flanker	6–30 s prestimulus	Increases or decreases (based on region) linked to performance
Sadaghiani et al., 2009	BOLD amplitude	Auditory detection	Up to 9s prestimulus	Increases or decreases (based on region) linked to performance
Thompson et al., 2013a	BOLD amplitude, Windowed correlation (12 s)	Vigilance	Up to 18s prestimulus	Greater anticorrelation or difference indicates better performance
Jia et al., 2014	Windowed correlation (7–72 s)	75 different tasks	During task	Windowed connectivity more related to behavior than static rsfMRI, greater dynamicity indicates better performance
Gonzalez-Castillo et al., 2015	Windowed correlation (23–180 s)	Math, 2-back working memory, Visual attention	Preceding scans (3 mins) and during task	Windowed connectivity more related to behavior than static rsfMRI, shorter windows better
Madhyastha et al., 2015	Windowed correlation (41 s)	Attention network task	Preceding scans (12 mins)	Dynamic rsfMRI more reliable and predicts different factors than static
Sadaghiani et al., 2015	Windowed correlation (15–25 s)	Auditory detection	Up to 25s prestimulus	Different connectivity patterns for hits vs. misses
Telesford et al., 2016	Windowed coherence (25–600 s)	Memory, attention	During task	Strong effect of window size, less effect of task
Wohlschlager et al., 2016	BOLD amplitude	Visual detection	2–4s prestimulus, during task	Primary visual field at rest linked to conscious detection of stimulus
Cassidy et al., 2016	Linear regression between network amplitudes	N-back working memory	During task	Dynamic connectivity changes predicted performance better than activation
Mooneyham et al., 2017	Windowed correlation (75 s)	Mindful breathing	During task	Specific states linked to mindfulness, training increases these states

		Stimulus
Raz et al., 2012	Windowed correlation (30 s)	Sadness-inducing films	During stimuli	Connectivity changes dynamically with emotion
Nummenmaa et al., 2014	Instantaneous phase synchrony	Unpleasant, neutral or pleasant narratives audio	During stimuli	Dynamic changes in different regions depending on the emotion

		Spontaneous states
Kucyi and Davis, 2014	Windowed correlation (30 s)	Daydreaming	Separate resting state and pain stimulation scans	Positive correlation between daydreaming and dynamicity between most nodes, but not during pain
Tagliazucchi and Laufs, 2014	Windowed correlation (120 s)	Sleep state	Nighttime (7pm) and standard resting state scans	Sleep states classifiable with dynamic rsfMRI, some stages higher or lower connectivity than wakefulness
Wilson et al., 2015	Windowed correlation (8–300 s)	Sleep state	During wakefulness and sleep	Default mode network correlation decreases with sleep stage
Wang et al., 2016	Windowed correlation (40 s) clustered into states	Eye closures	Separate resting state and auditory vigilance task scans	States linked to task performance correspond to fewer spontaneous eye closures in resting state
Kaufmann et al., 2016	Windowed correlation (120 s)	Sleep deprivation	Separate resting state and attention task scans	Morning to evening connectivity changes reverted by sleep, not by sleep deprivation