This talk aims to highlight the immense potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in advancing the field of psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Through the integration of machine learning algorithms, big data analytics, and neuroimaging techniques, AI has the potential to revolutionize the way we study human cognition and brain characteristics. In this talk, I will highlight our latest scientific advancements in utilizing AI to gain deeper insights into variations in cognitive performance across the lifespan and along the continuum from healthy to pathological functioning. The presentation will showcase cutting-edge examples of AI-driven applications, such as deep learning for automated scoring of neuropsychological tests, natural language processing to characeterize semantic coherence of patients with psychosis, and other application to diagnose and treat psychiatric and neurological disorders. Furthermore, the talk will address the challenges and ethical considerations associated with using AI in psychological research, such as data privacy, bias, and interpretability. Finally, the talk will discuss future directions and opportunities for further advancements in this dynamic field.

Cognitive neuroscience has witnessed great progress since modern neuroimaging embraced an open science framework, with the adoption of shared principles (Wilkinson et al., 2016), standards (Gorgolewski et al., 2016), and ontologies (Poldrack et al., 2011), as well as practices of meta-analysis (Yarkoni et al., 2011; Dockès et al., 2020) and data sharing (Gorgolewski et al., 2015). However, while functional neuroimaging data provide correlational maps between cognitive functions and activated brain regions, its usefulness in determining causal link between specific brain regions and given behaviors or functions is disputed (Weber et al., 2010; Siddiqiet al 2022). On the contrary, neuropsychological data enable causal inference, highlighting critical neural substrates and opening a unique window into the inner workings of the brain (Price, 2018). Unfortunately, the adoption of Open Science practices in clinical settings is hampered by several ethical, technical, economic, and political barriers, and as a result, open platforms enabling access to and sharing clinical (meta)data are scarce (e.g., Larivière et al., 2021). We are working with clinicians, neuroimagers, and software developers to develop an open source platform for the storage, sharing, synthesis and meta-analysis of human clinical data to the service of the clinical and cognitive neuroscience community so that the future of neuropsychology can be transdiagnostic, open, and FAIR. We call it neurocausal (https://neurocausal.github.io).

There is a growing body of evidence that reproducibility or replication is low in neuroscience and in neuroimaging in particular, but the factors affecting studies solidity are still generally poorly understood, and the solutions are not clearly exposed to the neuroimaging scientific community. In this talk, I will review the key factors contributing to irreproducible results in neuroimaging specifically in the context of explanatory or prediction studies and propose a series of practical steps to improve the neuroimaging (and neuroscience) results robustness and re-usability.

The human visual system enables us to recognize objects (e.g., this is a cup) and act upon them (e.g., grasp the cup) with astonishing ease and accuracy. For decades, it was widely accepted that these different functions rely on two separated cortical pathways. The ventral occipitotemporal pathway subserves object recognition, while the dorsal occipitoparietal pathway promotes visually guided actions. In my talk, I will discuss recent evidence from a series of neuropsychological, developmental and neuroimaging studies that were aimed to explore the nature of object representations in the dorsal pathway. The results from these studies highlight the plausible role of the dorsal pathway in object perception and reveal an interplay between shape representations derived by the two pathways. Together, these findings challenge the binary distinction between the two pathways and are consistent with the view that object recognition is not the sole product of ventral pathway computations, but instead relies on a distributed network of regions.