BRAIN PROCESSES ASSOCIATED WITH COGNITIVE CONTROL

ICON XII, Brisbane, Australia, 7/30/2014

Speakers

Diane Beck (U. of Illinois) The role of feedback in visual processing

Paul Corballis (U. of Auckland) Lateralisation o the ERP reveals neural correlates of

attention, distractor suppression, and visual short term memory

Gabriele Gratton (U. of Illinois) Investigating brain networks in task preparation

Pauline Baniqued (U. of Illinois) A functional and structural view of task-switching

dynamics in ageing

INVESTIGATING BRAIN NETWORKS IN TASK PREPARATION

Gabriele Gratton & Monica Fabiani Psychology Department & Beckman Institute University of Illinois

Cognitive control

Set of operations that prepares the brain to perform a particular cognitive task The same stimulus information can be processed in

different ways

It involves setting up the information processing system so as to weigh information appropriately for the particular task context at hand Notion of “prepared reflexes” (Allport, A&P, 1980)

Interaction between top-down and bottom-up processes

From Dosenbach et al.

PNAS 2007;104:11073-11078

Brain areas involved in cognitive control

From fMRI work

Cingulo-opercular network (black): Long-term goal setting

Dorsal attention network (yellow): Trial-to-trial adaptation

How are these areas related to each other?

Preparation paradigm

Gratton et al., 2009; Baniqued et al., 2013; Leaver et al., submitted; Low et al., in preparation

Recording period

Precue Stimulus

Reaction Stimulus

Precue Stimulus

400 ms

1600 ms

400 ms 400 ms

1600 ms 1600 ms

• Indicates the “rule” or task for that trial

• Use the default or old rule

Little activity

OR

• Use a different rule More activity

• Prompts when and how to perform the task

• Some level of conflict

• Indicates the “rule” or task for that trial

Recording period

1600 ms

EROS: A tool for studying the time course of preparatory activity

Reviews: Gratton & Fabiani, TICS, 2001 Gratton & Fabiani, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2010

EROS (Fast, neuronal)

ms

Signal averaging by stimulus

64 ms

128 ms

sec

Δ C

on

cen

tra

tio

n

NIRS (Slow, hemodynamic)

Derive: [HbO2] [HbR] Signal averaging by block

HbO2

HbR

10 sec

Optical Recording

Study 1 Auditory/Visual

Precue: Auditory Visual

A V

RS: Lft Hand Rt Hand

I O

Conflict: Hear “I” + See “O”

or

Hear “O” + See “I”

Study 2 Global/Local

Precue: Big Little

B L

RS: Lft Hand Rt Hand

S H

Conflict:

Study 3 Left/Right

Precue: Left Right

RS: Lft Hand Rt Hand

S T

Conflict:

S + T or

T + S

Study 4 Manual/Vocal

Precue: Hand Voice

H V

RS: Left Right

L R

Conflict:

Response

modality

unknown without

precue

H H H H

H

H H H H

H

H H H H

S S

S S

S S S S S

S S

S S

EROS: N=16/study

Task-general EROS activity

-3.00 0.00 +3.00 Z-scores

Time (ms)

230-330

345-560

Switch vs. No-Switch

Left/Right Manual/Vocal Auditory/Visual Global/Local

-3.00 0.00 +3.00 Z-scores

Local Global 280 ms 255 ms

130 ms 230 ms

Visual Auditory Left Right 170 ms 170 ms

560 ms Manual Vocal

510 ms

Task-specific EROS activity

Preparation for Global/Local Processing

Leaver et al., submitted

Behavioral Results

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

Local Global

RT

(m

s)

Congruent

Incongruent

Local task is harder than global task More conflict in local than in global task

Region of Interest (left)

Ph

ase

de

lay

(ps)

-100 100 300 500 700 900

Time (ms)

BA8

BA9

BA7

BA40

BA19

BA37

Interval of Interest

200-300 ms

300-400 ms

400-500 ms

500-600 ms

-3 0 +3 Z score

600-700 ms

Local - Global

0 ms 128 ms 307 ms 358 ms 51 ms

Y=-11 Z=43 z=3.091

Y=-26 Z=21 z=3.809

Y=-68 Z=43 z=4.383

Y=-11 Z=43 z=2.785

0 ms 153 ms 256 ms 333 ms 26 ms

Y=12 Z=29 z=2.882

Y=-26 Z=33 z=3.812

Y=-11 Z=23 z=3.433

Y=-21 Z=-18 z=2.911

Cross-correlation analysis

Left Hemisphere

Right Hemisphere

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Loca

l Pre

par

atio

n -

Glo

bal

Pre

par

atio

n

(ps)

Local Conflict Cost - Global Conflict Cost (ms)

BA9

BA7

Preparation helps reduce conflict

r=-.52, p<.05

r=-.57, p<.05

How do top-down processes influence bottom-up processing?

A flourishing of papers in the last five years indicate that processing of sensory stimuli is influenced by the amplitude and phase of oscillatory activity (alpha) in sensory cortex

E.g., Mathewson et al., JoN, 2009

Do attentional networks influence these oscillatory activities?

E.g., Thut & Miniussi, TICS, 2009

Meta-contrast masking

+

Fixation 247 ms

Blank 400 ms

Target 11.7 ms

ISI 46.8 ms

Mask 23.4 ms

Response ~1520 ms

Trial 2220 ms

1o

1o

2o

+

.5o

Mathewson et al., JoN, 2009

Brain states and detection

Averaged evoked potential for detected and undetected targets

Probability of detection for trials with large and small alpha power

Probability of detection for trials with alpha phase in “high” and “low” mode

Mathewson et al., JoN, 2009

77

75

73

71

69

67

65

Low High α Power

n. s. ** α Phase

45-225°

225-45°

77

75

73

71

69

67

65

α Power Quartile 1 3 4 2

De

tect

ion

Ra

te (

%)

-0.3

0.6

0.3

0

Vo

lta

ge

(μV

)

Time (ms) -100 -50 50 100

Target onset

0

All

Detected

Undetected

De

tect

ion

Ra

te (

%)

Cortical excitability and alpha oscillations

Sensory Input

High

Low

Small Amplitude Alpha Large Amplitude Alpha

Cortical Excitability Unconscious

Conscious

Brain activity prior to targets EROS alpha power map Detected - Undetected

-332 ms -255 ms

3 -3 0 5

10

15

20

25

30

Time (ms)

Fre

qu

en

cy (

Hz)

-1000 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400

5

10

15

20

25

30

Fixation Onset

Target Onset

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Power (dB) .75

-.75

EEG time frequency Detected - Undetected

Time-locked activity Detected vs. Undetected

Mathewson, Beck, Ro, Fabiani, & Gratton, 2014

-20 -10 -5 5 10 20

EROS 10 Hz Alpha Detected - Undetected

-255 ms

3 -3 0

500 1000 1500 2000 2500

50

100

150

200

250

300

Backward-Lagged Cross Correlation Seed in cuneus (alpha)

Alpha

D

-205 ms -179 ms -154 ms -128 ms -102 ms -77 ms -51 ms -26 ms 0 ms

lags

mPFC SFG IPS FEF

Alpha in Cuneus

Model

mPFC

SFG

IPS

FEF

Cuneus

3 -3 0

Discussion Interaction between task-general areas (involved in top-down

regulation) and task-specific areas (involved in bottom-up processing)

Task general areas include DAN and CON

Within DAN, frontal areas are activated before parietal ones

What is their respective role?

How are action plans represented here?

Task specific areas include visual, auditory, and motor networks During preparation, they are activated during the foreperiod

Regulation of these areas may involve up- or down-regulation of rhythmic activity

The phase of the rhythmic activity may be involved in gating information processing

It may represent the excitability of particular cortical regions

Acknowledgements

CNL (present): Monica Fabiani , Ph.D, Pauline Baniqued Courtney Burton Antonio Chiarelli, Ph.D. Antoine De Jong Mark Fletcher Tania Kong Christina Koury Kathy Low, Ph.D. Ed Maclin, Ph.D. Kyle Mathewson, Ph.D. Nils Schneider-Garces Chin Hong Tan John Walker Ben Zimmerman

Former students and postdocs Jason Agran, Vanderbilt Chandramallika Basak, UT Dallas Carrie Brumback, UC-Irvine Bruce Bartholow, UNC Paul Corballis, U of Auckland Corby Dale, UC-SF Brian Gordon, Washington Univ. Erika Henry, UMC Echo Leaver, Salisbury Univ. Nate Parks, U Arkansas Melanie Pearson, Emory Elena Rykhlevskaia, Stanford Univ. Jeff Sable, Christian Brothers Univ. Eunsam Shin, Korea Chun Yu Tse, CUHK Emily Wee, UIUC Christopher Whalen, Champaign Eddie Wlotko, Tufts

Collaborators Renee Baillargeon, UIUC Diane Beck, UIUC Gary Dell, UIUC Matt Dye, UIUC Kara Federmeier, UIUC Cynthia Fisher, UIUC Susan Garnsey, UIUC Enrico Gratton, UC Irvine Dan Hyde, UIUC Vicki Kazmerski, PSU-Erie Art Kramer, UIUC Alejandro Lleras, UIUC Eddie McAuley, UIUC Trevor Penney, NSU Tony Ro, CUNY Brad Sutton, UIUC Fabrice Wallois, U de Picardie

Extramural Funding Agencies Abbott/CNLM ABMRF Carle Foundation DARPA McDonnell-Pew Missouri ADRD NIA NIBIB NIMH NRCC ONR

Thank you

Dynamics of cognitive control

How does cognitive control operate?

What are the relationships between different cognitive control regions?

How do they influence each other?

How do they influence perceptual (bottom-up) areas?

What happens in the perceptual areas that influences stimulus processing?

Example: Conflict effects

Gratton et al., JEP: Gen., 1992

Feat.

Anal.

Conj.

Anal.

p(Feature Analysis) = acc(comp) – acc(incomp) p(Conjunction Analysis) = 0.5*(acc(comp)+acc(incomp))

HHHHH SSHSS

SSSSS HHSHH

Compatible Incompatible

Respond Left/Right

Respond Right/Left

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

Noise Type

Error Rate

Compatible Incompatible

460

480

500

520

540

560

Noise Type

Reaction Time (ms)

Compatible Incompatible

Conflict adaptation: Effects of changes in expectation

Exp. 1: Sequential effect Exp. 2: Blocked probability effect

Exp. 3: Cued probability effect

Large P3 Small P3

Gratton et al., JEP: General, 1992

* *

** **

Interpreting conflict adaptation

Strategy selection can be influenced by varying expectancy for compatible and incompatible noise

Precue A (predict compatible)

Precue B (predict incompatible) HHHHH SSHSS

SSSSS HHSHH

Compatible Incompatible

Feature Anal.

Conjunct. Anal.

Gratton et al., JEP: General, 1992

Predict compatible Predict incompatible

LRP

Comp.

Inc.

Summary

In RT tasks, subjects prepare for incoming stimuli by preparing appropriate stimulus-response plans ideomotor function

The front0-parietal network (FPN) exerts an important role in preparation Activation occurs first in frontal and then in parietal areas

Activation in FPN precedes that occurring in task-specific areas

The amount of preparatory activity is predictive of subsequent behavioral advantages

EROS provides a tool for tracking the time course of preparatory activity