34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effective connectivity during animacy perception – dynamic causal modelling of Human Connectome Project data

      research-article
      a , 1 , 2 ,   3 , 1
      Scientific Reports
      Nature Publishing Group

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Biological agents are the most complex systems humans have to model and predict. In predictive coding, high-level cortical areas inform sensory cortex about incoming sensory signals, a comparison between the predicted and actual sensory feedback is made, and information about unpredicted sensory information is passed forward to higher-level areas. Predictions about animate motion – relative to inanimate motion – should result in prediction error and increase signal passing from lower level sensory area MT+/V5, which is responsive to all motion, to higher-order posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), which is selectively activated by animate motion. We tested this hypothesis by investigating effective connectivity in a large-scale fMRI dataset from the Human Connectome Project. 132 participants viewed animations of triangles that were designed to move in a way that appeared animate (moving intentionally), or inanimate (moving in a mechanical way). We found that forward connectivity from V5 to the pSTS increased, and inhibitory self-connection in the pSTS decreased, when viewing intentional motion versus inanimate motion. These prediction errors associated with animate motion may be the cause for increased attention to animate stimuli found in previous studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects.

          One of the most robust experience-related cortical dynamics is reduced neural activity when stimuli are repeated. This reduction has been linked to performance improvements due to repetition and also used to probe functional characteristics of neural populations. However, the underlying neural mechanisms are as yet unknown. Here, we consider three models that have been proposed to account for repetition-related reductions in neural activity, and evaluate them in terms of their ability to account for the main properties of this phenomenon as measured with single-cell recordings and neuroimaging techniques. We also discuss future directions for distinguishing between these models, which will be important for understanding the neural consequences of repetition and for interpreting repetition-related effects in neuroimaging data.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dynamic causal modelling.

            In this paper we present an approach to the identification of nonlinear input-state-output systems. By using a bilinear approximation to the dynamics of interactions among states, the parameters of the implicit causal model reduce to three sets. These comprise (1) parameters that mediate the influence of extrinsic inputs on the states, (2) parameters that mediate intrinsic coupling among the states, and (3) [bilinear] parameters that allow the inputs to modulate that coupling. Identification proceeds in a Bayesian framework given known, deterministic inputs and the observed responses of the system. We developed this approach for the analysis of effective connectivity using experimentally designed inputs and fMRI responses. In this context, the coupling parameters correspond to effective connectivity and the bilinear parameters reflect the changes in connectivity induced by inputs. The ensuing framework allows one to characterise fMRI experiments, conceptually, as an experimental manipulation of integration among brain regions (by contextual or trial-free inputs, like time or attentional set) that is revealed using evoked responses (to perturbations or trial-bound inputs, like stimuli). As with previous analyses of effective connectivity, the focus is on experimentally induced changes in coupling (cf., psychophysiologic interactions). However, unlike previous approaches in neuroimaging, the causal model ascribes responses to designed deterministic inputs, as opposed to treating inputs as unknown and stochastic.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers.

              As an expert reviewer, it is sometimes necessary to ensure a paper is rejected. This can sometimes be achieved by highlighting improper statistical practice. This technical note provides guidance on how to critique the statistical analysis of neuroimaging studies to maximise the chance that the paper will be declined. We will review a series of critiques that can be applied universally to any neuroimaging paper and consider responses to potential rebuttals that reviewers might encounter from authors or editors. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group
                2045-2322
                01 September 2014
                2014
                : 4
                : 6240
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London , London, WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom
                [2 ]Moral Cognition Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Harvard University , Cambridge, MA, 02138, United States
                [3 ]Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London , WC1N 3BG, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Article
                srep06240
                10.1038/srep06240
                4150124
                25174814
                0d9d9c54-dab1-4c37-a8bf-8a9a60aa6ea4
                Copyright © 2014, Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder in order to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 17 March 2014
                : 21 July 2014
                Categories
                Article

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article