Table 1.

Pros and Cons of various neuroscientific tehcniques for monitoring and altering brain activities.

DisorderTechnology	Nature of technology	Pros	Cons
EEG (Recording technology)	NON INVASIVE	»Economical »Handy »Incredible temporal resolution	»Restricted spatial resolution »Only measures neural activity near the scalp
MEG (Recording technology)	NON INVASIVE	»Good temporal resolution »Contactless (with the body)	»Costly »Colossal and immobile
fNIRS (Recording technology)	NON INVASIVE	»Economical »Handy	»Laborious calibration »Low spatial and temporal resolution
fMRI (Recording technology)	NON INVASIVE	»Good spatial resolution »No physical contact with body	»High price »Poor temporal resolution »Colossal and immobile
ECoG (Recording technology)	INVASIVE	»Fine signal quality »Satisfactory temporal and spatial resolution	»High cost »Neurosurgery required
Implanted micro-electrodes (Recording and stimulation technology)	INVASIVE	»Fine signal quality »High definition temporal and spatial resolution	»Narrow coverage of brain area »Neurosurgery required
DBS (Stimulation technology)	INVASIVE	»High definition temporal and spatial resolution »stimulation of extensive brain regions permitted	»Threat associated with surgery (e.g., infections, interaction with brain neurons) »Neuropsychiatric side effects
tES (Stimulation technology)	NON INVASIVE	»Economical »Handy »Good spatial resolution for high-magnification tES	»Poor spatial resolution for normal tES »Long-term repercussions are still a mystery
TMS (Stimulation technology)	NON INVASIVE	»High degree of spatial and temporal resolution	»Costly »Bulky and immobile
FUS (Stimulation technology)	NON INVASIVE	»High degree of spatial and temporal resolution	»Inadequate clinical trials »Applicable to limited part of brain