| Literature DB >> 31727912 |
E Meaux1,2,3, V Sterpenich4, P Vuilleumier4,5.
Abstract
Emotions exert powerful effects on perception and memory, notably by modulating activity in sensory cortices so as to capture attention. Here, we examine whether emotional significance acquired by a visual stimulus can also change its cortical representation by linking neuronal populations coding for different memorized versions of the same stimulus, a mechanism that would facilitate recognition across different appearances. Using fMRI, we show that after pairing a given face with threat through conditioning, viewing this face activates the representation of another viewpoint of the same person, which itself was never conditioned, leading to robust repetition-priming across viewpoints in the ventral visual stream (including medial fusiform, lateral occipital, and anterior temporal cortex). We also observed a functional-anatomical segregation for coding view-invariant and view-specific identity information. These results indicate emotional signals may induce plasticity of stimulus representations in visual cortex, serving to generate new sensory predictions about different appearances of threat-associated stimuli.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31727912 PMCID: PMC6856165 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-52615-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1A. Predictive conceptual framework of emotion-driven plasticity in cortical representations of face ID. Prior to conditioning, we expect no overlapping activation of neurons coding for front (F) and quarter (Q) views among the cortical population. Each presentation of a face elicits a view specific representation. Throughout emotional signals mediated by amygdala feedback, we hypothesize that the representation of a face in front-view will not only be strengthened after being paired with threat (blue doted line), but also “enlarged” to become associated with another view (e.g. quarter) of the same face (yellow dotted line). After emotion learning, we predict that these new connections will lead to overlapping activation of F and Q neurons coding for the same face, leading to the emergence of face ID priming across different viewpoints. N.B. Each circle corresponds to one hypothetical neuron and lines represent connections between them within a cortical population. Filled circles indicate active neurons whereas empty circles indicate inactive neurons in response to either F or Q face presentation. B. Experimental Design. Familiarization session: Full-front and ¾-views (left or right) images of two neutral faces were presented in a rapid succession, always separated by a scrambled visual mask. Participants were asked to judge on each trial whether the two faces depicted the same or different individuals, allowing them to form robust representations of identity (ID) for different views of the same face. Aversive conditioning session: One of the two IDs used in the familiarization session in full-front view (familiar and conditioned stimulus, famCS+) was paired with a negative emotional experience (unpleasant loud sound), using a classic Pavlovian conditioning procedure with a 60% reinforcement. The other ID (familiar but not conditioned, famCS-) plus a series of filler faces (all unfamiliar) were paired with a neutral sound (soft beep noise). Importantly, all faces were always presented in front view only. Participants were instructed to look carefully at the faces and memorize them. Filler faces were added to increase encoding load and credibility of the memory task. Main repetition priming experiment: This session tested for any repetition priming effect when the same face ID (famCS+, famCS−, and new unknown faces) was presented in pairs of images, across different viewpoints. The famCS+, famCS-, and new unfamiliar faces (new) were presented in a rapid succession of two different images. The first image always depicted a full-front view (like during aversive conditioning), allowing for the generation of perceptual predictions, while the second image always depicted a ¾-view (either left or right deviated), and the identity of these two faces was either the same or different (repeated or non-repeated ID) in order to assess cross-view priming. Participants had to indicate whether the second face looked toward the left or right side. N.B. Faces used in the figure are home-made avatars created using FACsGen software for illustrative purpose only. Karolinska Face dataset 66 was used in the experiment.
Figure 2Factorial design of the repetition priming paradigm. The paradigm crossed 3 levels of emotional history – i.e. (1) familiar and conditioned (famCS+), (2) familiar but not conditioned (famCS), and (3) novel faces (new) – and 2 levels of ID repetition (1) same and (2) different face, yielding 6 possible conditions (CS+ same; CS+ diff; CS− same; CS− diff; new_same; new_diff). N.B. Faces used in the figure are home-made avatars created using FACsGen software for illustrative purpose only. Karolinska Face dataset[66] was used in the experiment.
Main effect of emotional history in the main repetition priming session.
| Contrast | Side | Structures | MNI cords | t | Cluster Size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x | y | z | |||||
| famCS+ (same+diff) > famCS− (same+diff) | L. | Post STS | −57 | −46 | 19 | 8.19 | 144* |
| L. | Mid STS | −48 | −19 | −5 | 5.17 | — | |
| L. | Temporal pole | −39 | −10 | −17 | 5.77 | 17* | |
| R. | Post STS | 66 | −31 | 7 | 7.55 | 156* | |
| R. | ant STS | 51 | −10 | −11 | 5.84 | 13* | |
| R. | Lateral FG (FFA) | 48 | −52 | −26 | 4.11 | 22* | |
| L. | Lateral FG | −36 | −55 | −20 | 3.57 | 5 ~ | |
| R. | Amygdala (AMY) | 27 | 5 | −23 | 3.58 | 5 ~ | |
| L. | dlPFC | −48 | 23 | 19 | 5.33 | 594 # | |
| L. | vlPFC | −30 | 26 | −5 | 5.09 | — | |
| L. | Primary motor cortex | −30 | −20 | 31 | 5.03 | — | |
| R. | dlPFC | 42 | 23 | 19 | 5.14 | 160 # | |
| R. | midFG | 42 | 8 | 31 | 3.38 | — | |
| L. | postCG | −3 | −16 | 34 | 5.09 | 15* | |
| R. | ACC | 3 | 8 | 28 | — | ||
| L. | Precuneus | −3 | −64 | 49 | 5.98 | 84* | |
Brain areas showing a history-related increases (see also Fig. 3, in red). Coordinates (MNI space) refer to maximally activated foci: x = distance (mm) to the right (+) or the left (−) of the mid sagittal line; y = distance anterior (+) or posterior (−) to the vertical plane through the anterior commissure; z = distance above (+) or below (−) the inter-commissural line. L and R refer to the left and right hemisphere, respectively. p values and their corrections are indicated by the symbols next to the voxel sizes. *p < 0.05 FWR corrected at the peak level for the whole brain (random-effect analysis), ~ p < 0.05 Small Volume Corrected (SVC), # p < 0.001 uncorrected. – indicate that the structure is part of the previously listed cluster.
Figure 3Brain areas showing emotional history-related increases (in red) and repetition-related decreases (in blue) as a function of emotional learning in the priming session (see also Tables 1, 2). (a) Whole brain maps indicate a functional-anatomical segregation within the FG with the latFG showing a main effect of emotional history and the medFG showing a selective repetition suppression effect for famCS+ faces. (b) Whole brain maps show history-related increases in anterior amygdala (AMY), and a history x repetition interaction in the anterior temporal lobe (ATL). For both a) and b) plots of the activity parameters illustrates beta weights as a function of face ID repetition. An index of cross-view repetition suppression was calculated by subtracting parameters to same view condition from the different view condition. Note that plots here are shown to illustrate the results but no post-hoc statistics were performed on these data.
Main effect of repetition (top) and interaction between emotional history and repetition (bottom) in the priming session.
| Contrast | Side | Structures | MNI cords | t | Cluster Size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x | y | z | |||||
| allDiff > allSame | L. | IFG | −39 | 14 | 19 | 3.60 | 10 # |
| R. | IFG | 48 | 8 | 25 | 3.35 | 5 # | |
| famCS+diff > famCS+same | R. | SFG | 21 | 20 | 55 | 3.81 | 26 # |
| L. | SFG | −18 | 17 | 58 | 3.57 | 20 # | |
| R. | Med FG | 6 | −22 | 61 | 3.63 | 13 # | |
| R. | Fusiform gyrus (FG) | 45 | −58 | −14 | 2.86 | 10 ~ | |
| (famCS+diff>famCS+same) > (famCS-diff>famCS-same)] | R. | Dorso-medial FG | 45 | −64 | −8 | 7.39 | 231* |
| 42 | −58 | −17 | 7.18 | — | |||
| R. | IOG (OFA) | 45 | −82 | −2 | 6.37 | — | |
| L. | Dorso-medial FG | −42 | −76 | −5 | 5.25 | 390 # | |
| L. | IOG (OFA) | −21 | −97 | 25 | 5.87 | — | |
| R. | ATL/Parahippocampal | 33 | −1 | −44 | 7.04 | 180 # | |
| R. | ATL/entorhinal | 18 | −16 | −26 | 4.91 | — | |
| L. | ATL/entorhinal | −24 | −10 | −26 | 5.36 | 52 # | |
| L. | ATL/ Parahippocampal | −30 | −10 | −35 | 3.57 | 11 # | |
| R. | Med. Frontal G. | 15 | −13 | 73 | 6.12 | 125* | |
| 9 | −16 | 64 | 5.69 | — | |||
| R. | Insula | 36 | −4 | −4 | 4.74 | 70 # | |
Brain areas showing a repetition-related decreases (see also Fig. 3, interaction in blue). Same conventions for coordinates as Table 1. *p < 0.05 FWR corrected at the peak level for the whole brain (random-effect analysis), ~ p < 0.05 Small Volume Corrected (SVC), # p < 0.001 uncorrected. – indicate that the structure is part of the previously listed cluster.