School of Education, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, 214122, China.
School of Linguistic Sciences and Arts, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, 221009, China.
Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 28;11(1):13396. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-92616-y.
The current study made participants sit to complete both the implicit sequence learning and the inclusion/exclusion tasks with the latter just after the former, and used eyes-closed and eyes-open resting states fMRI and their difference to test the ecological validity of the mutually exclusive theory (MET) in implicit-sequence-learning consciousness. (1) The behavioral and neuroimaging data did not support the process dissociation procedure, but did fit well with the MET. The correct inclusion-task response and the incorrect exclusion-task response were mutually exclusive with each other. The relevant brain areas of the two responses were either different or opposite in the eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states and their difference. (2) ALFFs in eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states and their difference were diversely related to the four MET knowledge in implicit sequence learning. The relevant brain areas of the four MET knowledge in the eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-state were the cerebral cortex responsible for vision, attention, cognitive control and consciousness, which could be called the upper consciousness network, and there were more relevant brain areas in the eyes-open resting-state than in the eye-closed resting-state.The relevant brain areas in ALFFs-difference were the subcortical nucleus responsible for sensory awareness, memory and implicit sequence learning, which could be called the lower consciousness network. ALFFs-difference could predict the four MET knowledge as a quantitative transition sensitivity index from internal feeling to external stimulus. (3) The relevant resting-state brain areas of the four MET knowledge were either different (for most brain areas, if some brain areas were related to one MET knowledge, they were not related to the other three MET knowledge) or opposite (for some brain areas, if some brain areas were positively related to one MET knowledge, they were negatively related to other MET knowledge). With the participants' control/consciousness level increasing from no-acquisition to controllable knowledge step by step, the positively relevant resting-state brain areas of the four MET knowledge changed from some consciousness network and the motor network, to some consciousness network and the implicit learning network, and then to some consciousness network; and the negatively relevant resting-state brain areas of the four MET knowledge changed from some consciousness network and visual perception network, to some consciousness network, then to some consciousness network and the motor network, and then to some consciousness network, the implicit learning network, and the motor network. In conclusion, the current study found the ecological validity of the MET was good in sitting posture and eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states, ALFFs in eyes-closed and eyes-open resting-states and their difference could predict the four MET knowledge diversely, and the four MET knowledge had different or opposite relevant resting-state brain areas.
当前的研究让参与者坐着完成内隐序列学习和包含/排除任务，后者紧随前者，使用闭眼和睁眼静息态 fMRI 及其差异来测试内隐序列学习意识中相互排斥理论（MET）的生态效度。(1) 行为和神经影像学数据不支持过程分离程序，但与 MET 非常吻合。正确的包含任务反应和错误的排除任务反应是相互排斥的。两种反应的相关脑区在闭眼和睁眼静息状态及其差异中要么不同，要么相反。(2) 闭眼和睁眼静息状态及其差异的 ALFFs 与内隐序列学习中的四种 MET 知识呈多样化关系。四种 MET 知识在闭眼和睁眼静息状态下的相关脑区是负责视觉、注意力、认知控制和意识的大脑皮层，可以称之为上意识网络，而且睁眼静息状态下的相关脑区比闭眼静息状态下的多。在 ALFFs 差异中与四种 MET 知识相关的脑区是负责感觉意识、记忆和内隐序列学习的皮质下核，可以称之为下意识网络。ALFFs 差异可以作为从内部感觉到外部刺激的定量转换敏感性指标来预测四种 MET 知识。(3) 四种 MET 知识的相关静息状态脑区要么不同（对于大多数脑区，如果一些脑区与一种 MET 知识有关，它们就与其他三种 MET 知识无关），要么相反（对于某些脑区，如果某些脑区与一种 MET 知识呈正相关，那么它们与其他 MET 知识就呈负相关）。随着参与者的控制/意识水平从无获取到可控知识逐步提高，四种 MET 知识的正相关静息状态脑区从一些意识网络和运动网络，到一些意识网络和内隐学习网络，再到一些意识网络；而四种 MET 知识的负相关静息状态脑区从一些意识网络和视觉感知网络，到一些意识网络，再到一些意识网络，然后到一些意识网络、内隐学习网络和运动网络。综上所述，本研究发现，MET 在坐姿和闭眼、睁眼静息状态下具有良好的生态效度，闭眼、睁眼静息态的 ALFFs 及其差异可以多方面预测四种 MET 知识，而四种 MET 知识的静息态相关脑区既有不同，也有相反。
