Literature DB >> 34385361

Implicit Neurofeedback Training of Feature-Based Attention Promotes Biased Sensory Processing during Integrative Decision-Making.

Angela I Renton1, David R Painter2,3,4, Jason B Mattingley5,2,6.   

Abstract

Complex perceptual decisions, in which information must be integrated across multiple sources of evidence, are ubiquitous but are not well understood. Such decisions rely on sensory processing of each individual source of evidence, and are therefore vulnerable to bias if sensory processing resources are disproportionately allocated among visual inputs. To investigate this, we developed an implicit neurofeedback protocol embedded within a complex decision-making task to bias sensory processing in favor of one source of evidence over another. Human participants of both sexes (N = 30) were asked to report the average motion direction across two fields of oriented moving bars. Bars of different orientations flickered at different frequencies, thus inducing steady-state visual evoked potentials. Unbeknownst to participants, neurofeedback was implemented to implicitly reward attention to a specific "trained" orientation (rather than any particular motion direction). As attentional selectivity for this orientation increased, the motion coherence of both fields of bars increased, making the task easier without altering the relative reliability of the two sources of evidence. Critically, these neurofeedback trials were alternated with "test" trials in which motion coherence was not contingent on attentional selectivity, allowing us to assess the training efficacy. The protocol successfully biased sensory processing, resulting in earlier and stronger encoding of the trained evidence source. In turn, this evidence was weighted more heavily in behavioral and neural representations of the integrated average, although the two sources of evidence were always matched in reliability. These results demonstrate how biases in sensory processing can impact integrative decision-making processes.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Many everyday decisions require active integration of different sources of sensory information, such as deciding when it is safe to cross a road, yet little is known about how the brain prioritizes sensory sources in the service of adaptive behavior, or whether such decisions can be altered through learning. Here we addressed these questions using a novel behavioral protocol that provided observers with real-time feedback of their own brain activity patterns in which sensory processing was implicitly biased toward a subset of the available information. We show that, while such biases are a normal and adaptive mechanism for humans to process complex visual information, they can also contribute to suboptimal decision-making.
Copyright © 2021 the authors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  SSVEPs; feature-based attention; forward encoding; implicit neurofeedback; integrative decision-making; sensory processing

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34385361      PMCID: PMC8482867          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0243-21.2021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  78 in total

1.  Stimulus-driven capture and contingent capture.

Authors:  Jan Theeuwes; Christian N L Olivers; Artem Belopolsky
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-11

Review 2.  The attention habit: how reward learning shapes attentional selection.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 5.691

3.  Feature-selective attention enhances color signals in early visual areas of the human brain.

Authors:  M M Müller; S Andersen; N J Trujillo; P Valdés-Sosa; P Malinowski; S A Hillyard
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Peripheral visual performance enhancement by neurofeedback training.

Authors:  Wenya Nan; Feng Wan; Chin Ian Lou; Mang I Vai; Agostinho Rosa
Journal:  Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback       Date:  2013-12

5.  Self-regulation of inter-hemispheric visual cortex balance through real-time fMRI neurofeedback training.

Authors:  F Robineau; S W Rieger; C Mermoud; S Pichon; Y Koush; D Van De Ville; P Vuilleumier; F Scharnowski
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-06-04       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 6.  Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion.

Authors:  M S Landy; L T Maloney; E B Johnston; M Young
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 7.  Advances in fMRI Real-Time Neurofeedback.

Authors:  Takeo Watanabe; Yuka Sasaki; Kazuhisa Shibata; Mitsuo Kawato
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 8.  The neural processes underlying perceptual decision making in humans: recent progress and future directions.

Authors:  Simon P Kelly; Redmond G O'Connell
Journal:  J Physiol Paris       Date:  2014-09-07

9.  fMRI neurofeedback of higher visual areas and perceptual biases.

Authors:  I Habes; S Rushton; S J Johnston; M O Sokunbi; K Barawi; M Brosnan; T Daly; N Ihssen; D E J Linden
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  No fixed item limit in visuospatial working memory.

Authors:  Sebastian Schneegans; Paul M Bays
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2016-08-06       Impact factor: 4.027

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.