Table 1.

Advantages and disadvantages of different neuroscience technologies for observing and influencing brain activity.

Technology	Invasive	Advantages	Disadvantages
EEG (recording technology)	No	Cheap Portable Very good temporal resolution	Limited spatial resolution Only measures neural activity near the scalp Low signal-to-noise ratio
MEG (recording technology)	No	Good temporal resolution No contact with the body	Expensive Bulky and not portable Primarily sensitive to surface activity Sensitive only to currents in certain directions
fMRI (recording technology)	No	Good spatial resolution No contact with the body	Expensive Bulky and not portable Poor temporal resolution
fNIRS (recording technology)	No	Cheap Portable	Difficult calibration Low spatial and temporal resolution
ECoG (recording technology)	Yes	Good signal quality Good temporal and spatial resolution	Neurosurgery required It only measures neural activity near the surface of the brain Expensive
Implanted micro-electrodes (recording and stimulation technology)	Yes	Good signal quality High temporal and spatial resolution	Neurosurgery required Very limited regions of the brain covered Risks associated to the surgery (e.g., infections)
DBS (stimulation technology)	Yes	It allows the stimulation of deeper brain regions than most other techniques High temporal and spatial resolution	Neuropsychiatric side effects (e.g., apathy) Difficult to keep electrodes in place Risks associated to the surgery (e.g., infections)
tES (stimulation technology)	Yes	Cheap Portable Good spatial resolution for high-definition tES	Low spatial resolution for normal tES Unknown long-term effects
TMS (stimulation technology)	Yes	Good spatial and temporal resolution	Expensive Bulky Unknown long-term effects
FUS (stimulation technology)	Yes	Good temporal and spatial resolution	Insufficiently tested on humans Applicable only to a small area of the brain