Oblak Ethan F, Lewis-Peacock Jarrod A, Sulzer James S
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Jul 28;13(7):e1005681. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005681. eCollection 2017 Jul.
Direct manipulation of brain activity can be used to investigate causal brain-behavior relationships. Current noninvasive neural stimulation techniques are too coarse to manipulate behaviors that correlate with fine-grained spatial patterns recorded by fMRI. However, these activity patterns can be manipulated by having people learn to self-regulate their own recorded neural activity. This technique, known as fMRI neurofeedback, faces challenges as many participants are unable to self-regulate. The causes of this non-responder effect are not well understood due to the cost and complexity of such investigation in the MRI scanner. Here, we investigated the temporal dynamics of the hemodynamic response measured by fMRI as a potential cause of the non-responder effect. Learning to self-regulate the hemodynamic response involves a difficult temporal credit-assignment problem because this signal is both delayed and blurred over time. Two factors critical to this problem are the prescribed self-regulation strategy (cognitive or automatic) and feedback timing (continuous or intermittent). Here, we sought to evaluate how these factors interact with the temporal dynamics of fMRI without using the MRI scanner. We first examined the role of cognitive strategies by having participants learn to regulate a simulated neurofeedback signal using a unidimensional strategy: pressing one of two buttons to rotate a visual grating that stimulates a model of visual cortex. Under these conditions, continuous feedback led to faster regulation compared to intermittent feedback. Yet, since many neurofeedback studies prescribe implicit self-regulation strategies, we created a computational model of automatic reward-based learning to examine whether this result held true for automatic processing. When feedback was delayed and blurred based on the hemodynamics of fMRI, this model learned more reliably from intermittent feedback compared to continuous feedback. These results suggest that different self-regulation mechanisms prefer different feedback timings, and that these factors can be effectively explored and optimized via simulation prior to deployment in the MRI scanner.
直接操纵大脑活动可用于研究大脑与行为之间的因果关系。当前的非侵入性神经刺激技术过于粗糙,无法操纵与功能磁共振成像(fMRI)记录的精细空间模式相关的行为。然而,通过让人们学习自我调节自己记录的神经活动,可以操纵这些活动模式。这种技术被称为fMRI神经反馈,面临着挑战,因为许多参与者无法进行自我调节。由于在MRI扫描仪中进行此类研究的成本和复杂性,这种无反应效应的原因尚未得到很好的理解。在这里,我们研究了fMRI测量的血液动力学反应的时间动态,将其作为无反应效应的潜在原因。学习自我调节血液动力学反应涉及一个困难的时间信用分配问题,因为这个信号在时间上既延迟又模糊。这个问题的两个关键因素是规定的自我调节策略(认知或自动)和反馈时间(连续或间歇)。在这里,我们试图在不使用MRI扫描仪的情况下评估这些因素如何与fMRI的时间动态相互作用。我们首先通过让参与者使用一维策略学习调节模拟神经反馈信号来研究认知策略的作用:按下两个按钮之一以旋转刺激视觉皮层模型的视觉光栅。在这些条件下,与间歇反馈相比,连续反馈导致更快的调节。然而,由于许多神经反馈研究规定了隐式自我调节策略,我们创建了一个基于自动奖励学习的计算模型,以检查这个结果对于自动处理是否成立。当基于fMRI的血液动力学延迟和模糊反馈时,与连续反馈相比,这个模型从间歇反馈中学习得更可靠。这些结果表明,不同的自我调节机制偏好不同的反馈时间,并且在部署到MRI扫描仪之前,可以通过模拟有效地探索和优化这些因素。