Taylor J S H, Rastle Kathleen, Davis Matthew H
Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham TW20 0EX, UK.
Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham Hill, Egham TW20 0EX, UK.
Neuroimage. 2014 Oct 1;99:419-33. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.073. Epub 2014 Jun 4.
It has been suggested that differential neural activity in imaging studies is most informative if it is independent of response time (RT) differences. However, others view RT as a behavioural index of key cognitive processes, which is likely linked to underlying neural activity. Here, we reconcile these views using the effort and engagement framework developed by Taylor, Rastle, and Davis (2013) and data from the domain of reading aloud. We propose that differences in neural engagement should be independent of RT, whereas, differences in neural effort should co-vary with RT. We illustrate these different mechanisms using data from an fMRI study of neural activity during reading aloud of regular words, irregular words, and pseudowords. In line with our proposals, activation revealed by contrasts designed to tap differences in neural engagement (e.g., words are meaningful and therefore engage semantic representations more than pseudowords) survived correction for RT, whereas activation for contrasts designed to tap differences in neural effort (e.g., it is more difficult to generate the pronunciation of pseudowords than words) correlated with RT. However, even for contrasts designed to tap neural effort, activity remained after factoring out the RT-BOLD response correlation. This may reveal unpredicted differences in neural engagement (e.g., learning phonological forms for pseudowords>words) that could further the development of cognitive models of reading aloud. Our framework provides a theoretically well-grounded and easily implemented method for analysing and interpreting RT effects in neuroimaging studies of cognitive processes.
有人认为,成像研究中的差异神经活动如果独立于反应时间(RT)差异,则最具信息价值。然而,其他人将RT视为关键认知过程的行为指标,这可能与潜在的神经活动有关。在这里,我们使用泰勒、拉斯特尔和戴维斯(2013年)开发的努力和参与框架以及来自大声朗读领域的数据来调和这些观点。我们提出,神经参与的差异应该独立于RT,而神经努力的差异应该与RT共同变化。我们使用来自一项功能磁共振成像(fMRI)研究的数据来说明这些不同的机制,该研究考察了在大声朗读规则单词、不规则单词和假词时的神经活动。与我们的提议一致,旨在挖掘神经参与差异的对比所揭示的激活(例如,单词是有意义的,因此比假词更多地参与语义表征)在对RT进行校正后仍然存在,而旨在挖掘神经努力差异的对比所产生的激活(例如,生成假词的发音比单词更困难)与RT相关。然而,即使对于旨在挖掘神经努力的对比,在排除RT与血氧水平依赖(BOLD)反应的相关性后,活动仍然存在。这可能揭示了神经参与中未预测到的差异(例如,学习假词的语音形式>单词),这可能会推动大声朗读认知模型的发展。我们的框架为分析和解释认知过程神经成像研究中的RT效应提供了一种理论基础扎实且易于实施的方法。