> The [fMRI imaging] results showed more brain activation and connection during nasal breathing than during oral breathing.
That doesn't prove anything. Apart from the problems in imaging connections, there's no reason to assume "more brain activation" means better cognitive functioning. Perhaps less is better, since a faster processing leads to a smaller BOLD response. There are more useful statistics in the article: the error rate and the response time. It looks as if "oral" was a bit faster, and had more errors. That might be enough to explain any imaging difference.
Does it mean impaired cognitive function? Well, that would depend on how strong your a prioris are. Is there any reason to assume it does? If not, then this most likely is a chance result. Perhaps oral breathing slightly impaired vision in the scanner or interferes with motor skills. Or perhaps it's the plug in the subjects' noses. This study needs a lot of additional support.
That doesn't prove anything. Apart from the problems in imaging connections, there's no reason to assume "more brain activation" means better cognitive functioning. Perhaps less is better, since a faster processing leads to a smaller BOLD response. There are more useful statistics in the article: the error rate and the response time. It looks as if "oral" was a bit faster, and had more errors. That might be enough to explain any imaging difference.
Does it mean impaired cognitive function? Well, that would depend on how strong your a prioris are. Is there any reason to assume it does? If not, then this most likely is a chance result. Perhaps oral breathing slightly impaired vision in the scanner or interferes with motor skills. Or perhaps it's the plug in the subjects' noses. This study needs a lot of additional support.