To predict, perchance to update: Neural responses to the unexpected

September 24, 2013 by Stuart Mason Dambrot, Medical Xpress feature
Uncorrected whole-brain activity patterns for surprise (IS) and updating (DKL). These maps are not corrected for multiple comparisons, and hence are shown only to give an impression of the overall pattern of activity that underlies the multiple comparisons-corrected effects reported in the main text. The maps are thresholded at Z > 2.0 uncorrected. Blue colors indicate surprise, and red/yellow colors indicate updating. Copyright © PNAS, doi:10.1073/pnas.1305373110

(Medical Xpress)—Among the brain's many functions is the use of predictive models to processing expected stimuli or actions. In such a model, we experience surprise when presented with an unexpected stimulus – that is, one which the model evaluates as having a low probability of occurrence. Interestingly, there can be two distinct – but often experimentally correlated – responses to a surprising event: reallocating additional neural resources to reprogram actions, and updating the predictive model to account for the new environmental stimulus. Recently, scientists at Oxford University used brain imaging to identify separate brain systems involved in reprogramming and updating, and created a mathematical and neuroanatomical model of how brains adjust to environmental change, Moreover, the researchers conclude that their model may also inform models of neurological disorders, such as extinction, Balint syndrome and neglect, in which this adaptive response to surprise fails.

Research Fellow Jill X. O'Reilly discussed the research she and her colleagues conducted with Medical Xpress. "Sometimes we think of the brain as an input-output device which takes sensory information, processes it, and produces actions appropriately – but in fact, brains don't passively 'sit around' waiting for ," O'Reilly explains. "Rather, they actively predict what is going to happen next, because by being prepared, they can process stimuli more efficiently."

O'Reilly cites an important example of predictive processing, which the researchers used in their study: the control of . "You can actually only process quite a small portion of visual space accurately at any one time, which is why people tend to actively look at interesting objects," O'Reilly tells Medical Xpress. "Parts of the brain that control eye movements – for example, the parietal cortex – are actively involved in trying to predict where visual objects that are worth looking at will occur next, in order to respond to them quickly and effectively." Since the scientists were interested in how the brain forms predictions – such as where eye movements should be directed – they designed an experiment in which people's expectations about where they should make eye movements were built up over time and then suddenly changed. (They did this moving the stimuli participants' were instructed to fixate on to a different part of the computer screen.)

"However," notes O'Reilly, "we know from previous work that activity in many brain areas is evoked when people are expecting to make an eye movement to one place, and actually they have to make an eye movement to another. A lot of this brain activity has to do with reprogramming the eye movement itself, rather than learning about the changed environment. That means we needed to design an experiment in which re-planning of eye movements was sometimes accompanied by learning, and sometimes not." The researchers accomplished this by color-coding stimuli: participants knew that colorful stimuli indicated a real change in the environment, while grey stimuli were to be ignored.

To quantify how much participants learned on each trial of the experiment, the team constructed a computer participant that learned about the environment in the same way the real, human participants did. Because they could determine exactly what the computer participant knew or believed about the environment – that is, where it would need to look – on each trial, we could get mathematical measures of how surprising it found each stimulus (defined as how far the stimulus location was from where the computer participant expected it to be) and how much it learned on each trial.

Therefore, the computer participant allowed the scientists to separately measure the degree to which human participants had to respond to surprise in terms of reprogramming eye movements, and how much they learned on each trial. "We then needed to work out whether some were specifically involved in each of these processes," O'Reilly continues. "To do this we used fMRI and looked for areas that increased their activity in proportion to how much the computer participant, and thereby the real participants, would need to reprogram their eye movements for each surprising stimulus – as well as the extent to which they'd have to update their predictions about future stimulus locations – on each trial."

O'Reilly stresses that the computer participant was critical to addressing the challenges they encountered. "We had access to a complete model of what participants could know or should believe about where stimuli were expected to appear on each trial. That meant we could make very specific predictions about how much they should be surprised by certain stimuli and how much they learned from each stimulus." The team checked these predictions by looking at behavioral measures like reaction time (participants were slower to move their eyes to surprising stimuli) and gaze dwell time (participants looked at stimuli for longer when the stimuli carried information about the possible locations of future stimuli).

O'Reilly describes how their study may inform understanding of neurological disorders in which this adjustment process fails by observing that a second saccade-sensitive region in the inferior posterior parietal cortex was activated by surprise and modulated by updating. "Some stroke victims are unable to move their eyes in order to look at stimuli that show up in their visual periphery, which turns out to be similar to the process of reprogramming to surprising stimuli in our model. In contrast," she continues, "people with brain lesions in a slightly different brain region are able to move their eyes to look at stimuli, but seem unable to learn that stimuli could occur in some parts of space – usually towards the left of the body – even if given lots of hints and training." Because the brain regions damaged in these two patient groups map onto the regions of parietal cortex active in the experiment's reprogramming and updating conditions, the researchers think these two processes could be differentially affected in the two patient groups.

Moving forward, the researchers would like to test their paradigm in patients who have had strokes that damaged the different brain regions activated in their study. "We'd expect to find a difference between patients with damage in different parts of , such that one group might be slower to reprogram eye movements to all surprising stimuli whether these stimuli are informative about future stimulus locations or not," O'Reilly concludes, "whereas the other group might have trouble learning that the location where are going to appear has changed."

Explore further: Neuronal activity in the visual cortex controlled by both where the eyes are looking and what they see

More information: Dissociable effects of surprise and model update in parietal and anterior cingulate cortex, PNAS September 17, 2013 vol. 110 no. 38 E3660-E3669, doi:10.1073/pnas.1305373110

Related Stories

Neuronal activity in the visual cortex controlled by both where the eyes are looking and what they see

September 20, 2013
Even though our eyes are constantly moving, the brain perceives the external world as stationary—a feat achieved by integrating images acquired by the retina with information about the direction of the gaze. An international ...

Why we look at the puppet, not the ventriloquist

August 30, 2013
(Medical Xpress)—As ventriloquists have long known, your eyes can sometimes tell your brain where a sound is coming from more convincingly than your ears can.

Brain pathways tie together mental maps

September 17, 2013
To find its way in the world, your brain has to decipher a set of directions muddled by different points of view. Individual neurons in the brain are constantly processing information about our surroundings, says Yuri Saalmann, ...

Helpful for robotics: Brain uses old information for new movements

April 18, 2013
Information from the senses has an important influence on how we move. For instance, you can see and feel when a mug is filled with hot coffee, and you lift it in a different way than if the mug were empty. Neuroscientist ...

One region, two functions: Brain cells' multitasking key to understanding overall brain function

March 6, 2013
A region of the brain known to play a key role in visual and spatial processing has a parallel function: sorting visual information into categories, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Chicago.

Brain may rely on computer-like mechanism to make sense of novel situations, study says

September 23, 2013
Our brains give us the remarkable ability to make sense of situations we've never encountered before—a familiar person in an unfamiliar place, for example, or a coworker in a different job role—but the mechanism our brains ...

Recommended for you

Mechanism behind neuron death in motor neurone disease and frontotemporal dementia discovered

April 20, 2018
Scientists have identified the molecular mechanism that leads to the death of neurons in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (also known as ALS or motor neurone disease) and a common form of frontotemporal dementia.

When there's an audience, people's performance improves

April 20, 2018
Often, people think performing in front of others will make them mess up, but a new study led by a Johns Hopkins University neuroscientist found the opposite: being watched makes people do better.

Signaling between neuron types found to instigate morphological changes during early neocortex development

April 20, 2018
A team of researchers from several institutions in Japan has found that developing neocortex neurons in mammals undergo a morphological transition from a multipolar shape to a bipolar shape due at least partially to signaling ...

MRI technique detects spinal cord changes in MS patients

April 20, 2018
A Vanderbilt University Medical Center-led research team has shown that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect changes in resting-state spinal cord function in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

Gene variant increases empathy-driven fear in mice

April 20, 2018
Researchers at the Center for Cognition and Sociality, within the Institute for Basic Science (IBS), have just published as study in Neuron reporting a genetic variant that controls and increases empathy-driven fear in mice. ...

Scientists identify connection between dopamine and behavior related to pain and fear

April 19, 2018
Scientists at the University of Maryland School of Medicine have for the first time found direct causal links between the neurotransmitter dopamine and avoidance—behavior related to pain and fear.

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (1) Sep 24, 2013
Extent this to auditory stimuli.
Kudos Oxford researchers.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.