Schizophrenia has long been framed as a disorder of broken thoughts and fractured perception, but a new line of research suggests the real story may lie in how the brain’s networks shudder and destabilize over time. The emerging picture is of a “brainquake,” a pattern of unstable connectivity that could help explain why psychosis can erupt so dramatically and why current treatments only partly restore balance. If that view holds up, it could force a rethink of how I, and many clinicians and researchers, understand, diagnose, and eventually treat this condition.
Instead of focusing only on static brain damage or isolated chemical imbalances, scientists are beginning to track how neural circuits fluctuate from moment to moment, and how those fluctuations differ in people with psychotic disorders. The early evidence points to brains that are not simply different in shape or chemistry, but fundamentally less stable in how they coordinate information, a shift that may open the door to new biomarkers and more targeted therapies.
From static snapshots to a moving picture of the psychotic brain
For decades, the dominant tools for studying schizophrenia have been structural scans that capture the brain as a still image, revealing where tissue has thinned or volumes have shrunk. In MRI studies of schizophrenia, the most consistent findings include reduced gray matter volumes of the medial temporal, superior temporal, and prefrontal areas, a pattern that has anchored much of the field’s thinking about the disorder’s biological roots and guided how I interpret brain imaging in clinical research settings. These structural changes, mapped carefully in In MRI analyses, suggest that memory, language, and executive control hubs are all compromised.
Yet static pictures can only go so far when the symptoms themselves are dynamic, waxing and waning over hours or days. Brain scans of people with schizophrenia can show structural differences in the brain, but brain scans alone, however, cannot diagnose the condition and must be interpreted alongside clinical assessments and other tests such as blood and urine workups, a limitation that has kept imaging on the sidelines of routine care. As I weigh these constraints, I see why researchers are turning toward methods that capture not just where the brain is altered, but how its networks behave over time, a shift reflected in work showing that the psychotic brain’s activity patterns are more irregular and less predictable than those of people without such disorders.
What the “brainquake” actually is
The “brainquake” label comes from studies that track how brain networks flicker between different states, revealing a kind of internal turbulence rather than a single, stable abnormality. In these experiments, the brains of the people with psychotic disorders were noticeably more unbalanced, the researchers found, showing more irregular and random connectivity that suggests the underlying circuits are struggling to maintain equilibrium. That instability, described in detail in reports on more irregular and random connectivity, looks less like a single lesion and more like a system that is constantly on the verge of slipping out of sync.
At the moment, it is not clear if these disruptions are helping to drive psychotic disorders or are something that is a consequence of long-standing illness and treatment, a chicken-and-egg problem that I find researchers grappling with in almost every conversation about causality. The brains of the people with psychotic disorders were noticeably more unbalanced, the researchers found, showing more irregular and random connectivity that may reflect both underlying vulnerability and the brain’s attempts to compensate. In one summary of the work, the authors describe how, in this study, they provide a new way to quantify how the brain’s networks that support attention, memory, and sensory information processing can tip into chaotic patterns, a point underscored in coverage that notes “In this study, we provide” a framework for measuring that imbalance.
How dynamic network instability fits with earlier brain research
When I place the brainquake idea alongside older findings, it looks less like a radical break and more like a missing piece that helps connect structural, functional, and molecular data. Earlier work on brain development in psychosis has shown that neurons can go astray during critical periods, with advances in developmental neurobiology giving us a clearer view of the molecular mechanisms of brain development that probably underlie the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. Those insights, summarized in analyses noting that These advances are giving us a clearer understanding of how miswired circuits emerge, set the stage for a model in which early developmental glitches create networks that are inherently less stable.
Functional imaging has already hinted that these miswired circuits behave differently, even at rest. In one ambitious project, researchers estimated subject-specific intrinsic connectivity networks and their temporal dynamics using psychotic resting-state functional MRI, building a data-driven brain network model that captures how activity flows across regions over time. The results, which reported that the team Results Estimated these patterns in detail, show that people with psychosis have more complex and less predictable spatiotemporal activity, a finding that dovetails neatly with the notion of a brain that is constantly quivering between states rather than resting in a stable configuration.
Chemistry, circuits, and the new imaging toolkit
The shift from static to dynamic views of schizophrenia is not just about clever math, it is also about new tools that let scientists watch chemistry and connectivity interact in real time. Neuroscientists used PET imaging and other means to identify neurochemical alterations in the brain that are associated with psychosis, mapping how dopamine and other transmitters fluctuate in people with the condition and how those changes track with symptoms. In one synthesis of this work, the authors note that Neuroscientists used PET to reveal that neurochemical shifts are not uniform across the brain, but cluster in circuits that also show abnormal connectivity on functional scans.
When I look at these PET findings alongside the brainquake data, a pattern emerges in which chemical surges and dips may help trigger or amplify the unstable network dynamics seen in resting-state MRI. Brain scans of people with schizophrenia can show structural differences in the brain, but brain scans alone, however, can only hint at the underlying chemistry, which is why combining PET with functional MRI is so powerful. Reports that highlight how Brain scans must be interpreted alongside other tests underscore the need for multimodal approaches that can link molecular disruptions to the moment-to-moment instability that defines the brainquake pattern.
Why the “brainquake” matters for diagnosis and prediction
If the brainquake signature holds up across larger samples, it could eventually give clinicians a new kind of biomarker, one that captures how the brain behaves rather than just how it looks. At the moment, it is not clear if these disruptions are helping to drive psychotic disorders or are something that is a consequence of illness, but even a consequence can be clinically useful if it reliably distinguishes people at high risk from those whose symptoms are driven by other conditions. The brains of the people with psychotic disorders were noticeably more unbalanced, the researchers found, showing more irregular and random connectivity that might, with further validation, be distilled into a metric that flags when a person’s networks are approaching a tipping point.
That kind of dynamic marker would be a significant departure from current practice, where diagnosis still rests on clinical interviews and behavioral observation, and where imaging is used mainly to rule out other causes such as tumors or strokes. Brain scans of people with schizophrenia can show structural differences in the brain, but brain scans alone, however, cannot yet tell a psychiatrist whether a teenager with subtle symptoms is on a trajectory toward full-blown psychosis. As I consider the trajectory of this research, I see parallels with other fields where complex diseases are being redefined by their dynamic signatures, such as cardiology’s use of heart rhythm variability or oncology’s shift toward molecular profiling, and I suspect psychiatry will eventually follow a similar path once the brainquake metrics are robust enough.
Lessons from other systemic disorders
One reason I take the brainquake model seriously is that it echoes patterns seen in other complex diseases, where subtle disruptions in one organ ripple through entire systems. In cancer-related cachexia, for example, researchers have shown that a muscle-wasting syndrome can be tied to liver REV-ERBα disruption, revealing how a molecular glitch in one tissue can drive widespread metabolic collapse. The authors of that work argue that Our findings open up new possibilities to better diagnose the syndrome and explore therapeutic interventions, a claim that is captured in the line Our findings open up new possibilities to rethink how cachexia is detected and treated.
Schizophrenia may follow a similar pattern, with early disruptions in brain development or neurotransmitter systems setting off a cascade that eventually destabilizes large-scale networks. These advances are giving us a clearer view of the molecular mechanisms of brain development that probably underlie the pathogenesis of schizophrenia, and when I connect that developmental story to the brainquake data, the disorder starts to look less like a purely “mental” illness and more like a systemic brain condition with identifiable, measurable dynamics. Just as cachexia research has moved from vague descriptions of wasting to precise molecular targets, the hope is that psychosis research can move from broad labels to specific network and molecular signatures that can be tracked and modified.
What this could mean for treatment strategies
The therapeutic implications of a brainquake model are still speculative, but they are concrete enough to influence how I think about future interventions. If psychosis involves networks that are inherently unstable, then treatments might aim not only to dampen dopamine or other transmitters, but also to stabilize connectivity patterns, perhaps through neuromodulation, cognitive training, or drugs that target network-level properties. Neuroscientists used PET imaging and other means to identify neurochemical alterations in the brain that are associated with psychosis, and those same tools could be used to monitor how new therapies affect both chemistry and connectivity in tandem.
There is also a more immediate, practical angle. Brain scans of people with schizophrenia can show structural differences in the brain, but brain scans alone, however, are rarely used to guide medication choices or predict who will respond to which drug. If dynamic connectivity measures can be linked to treatment response, clinicians might one day use a combination of PET, resting-state MRI, and cognitive testing to personalize care, much as oncologists now tailor regimens based on tumor genetics. The results that Estimated subject-specific intrinsic connectivity networks and their temporal dynamics using psychotic rsfMRI hint at a future in which those estimates are not just research curiosities but clinical tools, a possibility that becomes more plausible as the brainquake concept gains empirical support.
The unanswered questions that will shape the next decade
For all its promise, the brainquake idea raises as many questions as it answers, and I find the most important of these revolve around timing and causality. At the moment, it is not clear if these disruptions are helping to drive psychotic disorders or are something that is a consequence of chronic illness, medication exposure, or repeated episodes of psychosis. Longitudinal studies that follow high-risk individuals from childhood through the onset of symptoms will be crucial to determine whether unstable connectivity appears before the first psychotic break, or whether it emerges only after the brain has been buffeted by years of illness.
Another open question is how specific the brainquake pattern is to schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders. The brains of the people with psychotic disorders were noticeably more unbalanced, the researchers found, showing more irregular and random connectivity, but other conditions such as bipolar disorder, severe depression, or even chronic stress might also produce network instability. These advances are giving us a clearer view of the molecular mechanisms of brain development that probably underlie the pathogenesis of schizophrenia, yet they also remind me that the brain’s networks are shaped by a lifetime of experiences, from trauma to substance use, which could all leave their own signatures on connectivity. Sorting out which aspects of the brainquake are specific to psychosis, and which are shared across diagnoses, will determine whether this becomes a precise biomarker or a broader indicator of neural distress.
More from MorningOverview