When is an error not a prediction error? An electrophysiological investigation

A recent theory holds that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) uses reinforcement learning signals conveyed by the midbrain dopamine system to facilitate flexible action selection. According to this position, the impact of reward prediction error signals on ACC modulates the amplitude of a component of the event-related brain potential called the error-related negativity (ERN). The theory predicts that ERN amplitude is monotonically related to the expectedness of the event: It is larger for unexpected outcomes than for expected outcomes. However, a recent failure to confirm this prediction has called the theory into question. In the present article, we investigated this discrepancy in three trial-and-error learning experiments. All three experiments provided support for the theory, but the effect sizes were largest when an optimal response strategy could actually be learned. This observation suggests that ACC utilizes dopamine reward prediction error signals for adaptive decision making when the optimal behavior is, in fact, learnable

Action Without Awareness: Reaching to an Object You Do Not Remember Seeing

BACKGROUND: Previous work by our group has shown that the scaling of reach trajectories to target size is independent of obligatory awareness of that target property and that "action without awareness" can persist for up to 2000 ms of visual delay. In the present investigation we sought to determine if the ability to scale reaching trajectories to target size following a delay is related to the pre-computing of movement parameters during initial stimulus presentation or the maintenance of a sensory (i.e., visual) representation for on-demand response parameterization. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants completed immediate or delayed (i.e., 2000 ms) perceptual reports and reaching responses to different sized targets under non-masked and masked target conditions. For the reaching task, the limb associated with a trial (i.e., left or right) was not specified until the time of response cuing: a manipulation that prevented participants from pre-computing the effector-related parameters of their response. In terms of the immediate and delayed perceptual tasks, target size was accurately reported during non-masked trials; however, for masked trials only a chance level of accuracy was observed. For the immediate and delayed reaching tasks, movement time as well as other temporal kinematic measures (e.g., times to peak acceleration, velocity and deceleration) increased in relation to decreasing target size across non-masked and masked trials. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results demonstrate that speed-accuracy relations were observed regardless of whether participants were aware (i.e., non-masked trials) or unaware (i.e., masked trials) of target size. Moreover, the equivalent scaling of immediate and delayed reaches during masked trials indicates that a persistent sensory-based representation supports the unconscious and metrical scaling of memory-guided reaching

The Effect of Sensory Uncertainty Due to Amblyopia (Lazy Eye) on the Planning and Execution of Visually-Guided 3D Reaching Movements

Background: Impairment of spatiotemporal visual processing in amblyopia has been studied extensively, but its effects on visuomotor tasks have rarely been examined. Here, we investigate how visual deficits in amblyopia affect motor planning and online control of visually-guided, unconstrained reaching movements. Methods: Thirteen patients with mild amblyopia, 13 with severe amblyopia and 13 visually-normal participants were recruited. Participants reached and touched a visual target during binocular and monocular viewing. Motor planning was assessed by examining spatial variability of the trajectory at 50–100 ms after movement onset. Online control was assessed by examining the endpoint variability and by calculating the coefficient of determination (R 2) which correlates the spatial position of the limb during the movement to endpoint position. Results: Patients with amblyopia had reduced precision of the motor plan in all viewing conditions as evidenced by increased variability of the reach early in the trajectory. Endpoint precision was comparable between patients with mild amblyopia and control participants. Patients with severe amblyopia had reduced endpoint precision along azimuth and elevation during amblyopic eye viewing only, and along the depth axis in all viewing conditions. In addition, they had significantly higher R 2 values at 70 % of movement time along the elevation and depth axes during amblyopic eye viewing. Conclusion: Sensory uncertainty due to amblyopia leads to reduced precision of the motor plan. The ability to implemen

Best practice for motor imagery: a systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The literature suggests a beneficial effect of motor imagery (MI) if combined with physical practice, but detailed descriptions of MI training session (MITS) elements and temporal parameters are lacking. The aim of this review was to identify the characteristics of a successful MITS and compare these for different disciplines, MI session types, task focus, age, gender and MI modification during intervention.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An extended systematic literature search using 24 databases was performed for five disciplines: Education, Medicine, Music, Psychology and Sports. References that described an MI intervention that focused on motor skills, performance or strength improvement were included. Information describing 17 MITS elements was extracted based on the PETTLEP (physical, environment, timing, task, learning, emotion, perspective) approach. Seven elements describing the MITS temporal parameters were calculated: study duration, intervention duration, MITS duration, total MITS count, MITS per week, MI trials per MITS and total MI training time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Both independent reviewers found 96% congruity, which was tested on a random sample of 20% of all references. After selection, 133 studies reporting 141 MI interventions were included. The locations of the MITS and position of the participants during MI were task-specific. Participants received acoustic detailed MI instructions, which were mostly standardised and live. During MI practice, participants kept their eyes closed. MI training was performed from an internal perspective with a kinaesthetic mode. Changes in MI content, duration and dosage were reported in 31 MI interventions. Familiarisation sessions before the start of the MI intervention were mentioned in 17 reports. MI interventions focused with decreasing relevance on motor-, cognitive- and strength-focused tasks. Average study intervention lasted 34 days, with participants practicing MI on average three times per week for 17 minutes, with 34 MI trials. Average total MI time was 178 minutes including 13 MITS. Reporting rate varied between 25.5% and 95.5%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>MITS elements of successful interventions were individual, supervised and non-directed sessions, added after physical practice. Successful design characteristics were dominant in the Psychology literature, in interventions focusing on motor and strength-related tasks, in interventions with participants aged 20 to 29 years old, and in MI interventions including participants of both genders. Systematic searching of the MI literature was constrained by the lack of a defined MeSH term.</p

Relationship Between Reward-Related Brain Activity and Opportunities to Sit

The present study tested whether energy-minimizing behaviors evoke reward-related brain activity that promotes the repetition of these behaviors via reinforcement learning processes. Fifty-eight healthy young adults in a standing position performed a task where they could earn a reward either by sitting down or squatting while undergoing electroencephalographic (EEG) recording. Reward-prediction errors were quantified as the amplitude of the EEG-derived reward positivity. Results showed that reward positivity was larger on reward versus no reward trials, confirming the validity of our paradigm to measure evoked reward-related brain activity. However, results showed no evidence that sitting (versus standing and squatting) trials led to larger reward positivity. Moreover, we found no evidence suggesting that this effect was moderated by typical physical activity, physical activity on the day of the study, or energy expenditure during the experiment. However, at the behavioral level, results showed that the probability of choosing the stimulus more likely to lead to sitting than standing increased as the number of trials increased. In addition, results revealed that the probability of changing the selected stimulus was higher when the previous trial was a stand trial relative to a sit trial. In sum, neural results showed no evidence supporting the theory that opportunities to minimize energy expenditure are rewarding. However, behavioral findings suggested participants tend to choose the less effortful behavioral alternative and were therefore consistent with the theory of effort minimization (TEMPA)