Department of Psychology and Program in Neuroscience, Amherst College, Amherst, Massachusetts 01002
McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139.
J Neurosci. 2020 Jun 17;40(25):4925-4935. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0120-20.2020. Epub 2020 May 14.
To identify the neural correlates of perceptual awareness, researchers often compare the differences in neural activation between conditions in which an observer is or is not aware of a stimulus. While intuitive, this approach often contains a critical limitation: to link brain activity with perceptual awareness, observers traditionally report the contents of their perceptual experience. However, relying on observers' reports is problematic because it is difficult to know whether the neural responses being measured are associated with conscious perception or with postperceptual processes involved in the reporting task (e.g., working memory, decision-making). To address this issue, we combined a standard visual masking paradigm with a recently developed "no-report" paradigm in male/female human participants. In the visual masking paradigm, observers saw images of animals and objects that were visible or invisible, depending on their proximity to masks. Meanwhile, on half of the trials, observers reported the contents of their perceptual experience (i.e., report condition), while on the other half of trials they refrained from reporting about their experiences (i.e., no-report condition). We used electroencephalography to examine how visibility interacts with reporting by measuring the P3b event-related potential, one of the proposed canonical "signatures" of conscious processing. Overall, we found a robust P3b in the report condition, but no P3b whatsoever in the no-report condition. This finding suggests that the P3b itself is not a neural signature of conscious processing and highlights the importance of carefully distinguishing the neural correlates of perceptual awareness from postperceptual processing. What are the neural signatures that differentiate conscious and unconscious processing in the brain? Perhaps the most well established candidate signature is the P3b event-related potential, a late slow wave that appears when observers are aware of a stimulus, but disappears when a stimulus fails to reach awareness. Here, however, we found that the P3b does not track what observers are perceiving, but instead tracks what observers are reporting. When observers are aware of simple visual stimuli, the P3b is nowhere to be found unless observers are reporting the contents of their experience. These results challenge the well established notion of the P3b as a neural marker of awareness and highlight the need for new approaches to the neuroscience of consciousness.
为了确定感知意识的神经关联,研究人员通常会比较观察者在意识到或未意识到刺激时的神经激活差异。虽然这种方法直观,但它通常包含一个关键的局限性:为了将大脑活动与感知意识联系起来,观察者传统上报告他们的感知体验的内容。然而,依赖观察者的报告是有问题的,因为很难知道所测量的神经反应是与有意识的感知相关,还是与报告任务中涉及的后感知过程(例如工作记忆、决策)相关。为了解决这个问题,我们在男性/女性人类参与者中结合了标准的视觉掩蔽范式和最近开发的“无报告”范式。在视觉掩蔽范式中,观察者看到动物和物体的图像,这些图像的可见性取决于它们与掩蔽物的接近程度。同时,在一半的试验中,观察者报告他们的感知体验的内容(即报告条件),而在另一半试验中,他们避免报告他们的体验(即无报告条件)。我们使用脑电图来检查报告如何通过测量 P3b 事件相关电位(一种被提议的意识处理的“典型”特征之一)与可见性相互作用。总的来说,我们在报告条件下发现了一个强大的 P3b,但在无报告条件下根本没有 P3b。这一发现表明 P3b 本身不是意识处理的神经特征,并强调了仔细区分感知意识的神经关联与后感知处理的重要性。大脑中区分有意识和无意识处理的神经特征是什么?也许最成熟的候选特征是 P3b 事件相关电位,这是一种当观察者意识到刺激时出现的晚期慢波,但当刺激未能达到意识时它就会消失。然而,在这里,我们发现 P3b 并不跟踪观察者正在感知的内容,而是跟踪观察者正在报告的内容。当观察者意识到简单的视觉刺激时,如果观察者不报告他们的体验内容,就找不到 P3b。这些结果挑战了 P3b 作为意识的神经标志物的既定概念,并强调了需要新的方法来研究意识的神经科学。