Brain rhythms in cognition -- controversies and future directions
Abstract
Brain rhythms seem central to understanding the neurophysiological basis of human cognition. Yet, despite significant advances, key questions remain unresolved. In this comprehensive position paper, we review the current state of the art on oscillatory mechanisms and their cognitive relevance. The paper critically examines physiological underpinnings, from phase-related dynamics like cyclic excitability, to amplitude-based phenomena, such as gating by inhibition, and their interactions, such as phase-amplitude coupling, as well as frequency dynamics, like sampling mechanisms. We also critically evaluate future research directions, including travelling waves and brain-body interactions. We then provide an in-depth analysis of the role of brain rhythms across cognitive domains, including perception, attention, memory, and communication, emphasising ongoing debates and open questions in each area. By summarising current theories and highlighting gaps, this position paper offers a roadmap for future research, aimed at facilitating a unified framework of rhythmic brain function underlying cognition.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2507.15639,
title = {Brain rhythms in cognition -- controversies and future directions},
author = {Anne Keitel and Christian Keitel and Mohsen Alavash and Karin Bakardjian and Christopher S. Y. Benwell and Sophie Bouton and Niko A. Busch and Antonio Criscuolo and Keith B. Doelling and Laura Dugue and Laetitia Grabot and Joachim Gross and Simon Hanslmayr and Laura-Isabelle Klatt and Daniel S. Kluger and Gemma Learmonth and Raquel E. London and Christina Lubinus and Andrea E. Martin and Jonas Obleser and Johanna M. Rimmele and Vincenzo Romei and Manuela Ruzzoli and Felix Siebenhuhner and Sophie Slaats and Eelke Spaak and Luca Tarasi and Gregor Thut and Jelena Trajkovic and Danying Wang and Malte Wostmann and Benedikt Zoefel and Satu Palva and Paul Sauseng and Sonja A. Kotz},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15639},
year = {2025}
}
Comments
2 figures