1 / 13

Reading Hidden Intentions in the Human Brain

Reading Hidden Intentions in the Human Brain. John-Dylan Haynes, Katsuyuki Sakai, Geraint Rees, Sam Gilbert, Chris Frith, and Richard E. Passingham. Tae Hyuk Keum. Introduction. Goal-related processing increases activity in prefrontal cortex

andres
Download Presentation

Reading Hidden Intentions in the Human Brain

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reading Hidden Intentions in the Human Brain John-Dylan Haynes,Katsuyuki Sakai, Geraint Rees, Sam Gilbert, Chris Frith, and Richard E. Passingham Tae Hyuk Keum

  2. Introduction • Goal-related processing increases activity in prefrontal cortex • frontopolar, lateral, medial, and prefrontal cortex

  3. Introduction • Previous studies proposed: • Preparation of motor responses • Holding a set of potential choices in mind • Tracking memory of previous choices • General processes for establishing a new task • What is unclear: • - Whether the increase in prefrontal activity • encode a subject’s current intention

  4. Hypothesis/Aim • Prefrontalcortex possibly encodes information currently being prepared by a subject • Use choice-delay-response task to see if it is possible to decodefrom activity in prefrontalcortex which task the subjects were covertlyintending to perform

  5. Experiment • Participants: • 3 Male, 5 Female • Age (21 ~ 35) • All right-handed • Had normal vision or corrected vision acuity • Choice-delay-response task • - 8 scanning runs (32 trials each) • - fMRI 3T

  6. Experiment + or - 2 correct 2 wrong 2.8 ~ 10.7s 2s

  7. Experiment • Decoding analysis • Searchlight approach • Multivariate pattern recognition • Classification according to the typical response pattern • Voxel-by-voxel analysis to create 3D spatial map according to decoding accuracy

  8. Results Green: intention coded during delay Red: intention coded during execution

  9. Results • MPFCa activity: - significantly high decoding accuracy only during delay (covert intention) - overall increase during delay • MPFCp activity informative during task execution but not delay • No difference in both intentions (+,-) for overall activity other than spatial patterns

  10. ? Discussion • MPFCa encode goals during preparation • MPFCp encode goals during execution • MPFC contain localizable task-specific representations of chosen intentions (shown for 1st time) • Two intentions are coded not by increase in global activity, but by spatial response patterns

  11. ? • Strengths • Subjects rarely chose wrong answer (5%) • Complex/systematic fMRI analysis • Fine-grained neural representations • Very well controlled • Variable delay • Randomized response positions • No covert motor preparations • Limitations • - Unable to separate motor preparations from encoding of intentions during execution period • - Rapid pacing of trials • -cannot analyze period prior to cued selection • - Experiment is quite long (32 trials X 8 runs)

  12. ? Future studies • Is MPFC generally involved in encoding task-specific intentions or for +/- specifically? • Possible to decode which task is chosen before being aware of choosing it? • Do regions of PFC have clustered functional specializations?

  13. ? References

More Related