Eliot Hazeltine

Functional mapping of sequence learning in normal humans

The brain localization of motor sequence learning was studied in normal subjects with positron emission tomography. Subjects performed a serial reaction time (SRT) task by responding to a series of stimuli that occurred at four different spatial positions. The stimulus locations were either determined randomly or according to a 6-element sequence that cycled continuously. The SRT task was performed under two conditions. With attentional interference from a secondary counting task there was no development of awareness of the sequence. Learning-related increases of cerebral blood flow were located in contralateral motor effector areas including motor cortex, supplementary motor area, and putamen, consistent with the hypothesis that nondeclarative motor learning occurs in cerebral areas that control limb movements. Additional cortical sites included the rostral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex. The SRT learning task was then repeated with a new sequence and no attentional interference. In this condition, 7 of 12 subjects developed awareness of the sequence. Learning-related blood flow increases were present in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, right premotor cortex, right ventral putamen, and biparieto-occipital cortex. The right dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal areas have been previously implicated in spatial working memory and right prefrontal cortex is also implicated in retrieval tasks of verbal episodic memory. Awareness of the sequence at the end of learning was associated with greater activity in bilateral parietal, superior temporal, and right premotor cortex. Motor learning can take place in different cerebral areas, contingent on the attentional demands of the task.

Dissociable contributions of prefrontal and parietal cortices to response selection.

The ability to select between possible responses to a given situation is central to human cognition. The goal of this study was to distinguish between brain areas representing candidate responses and areas selecting between competing response alternatives. Event-related fMRI data were acquired while 10 healthy adults performed a task used to examine response competition: the Eriksen flanker task. Left parietal cortex was activated by either of two manipulations that increased the need to maintain a representation of possible responses. In contrast, lateral prefrontal and rostral anterior cingulate cortices were specifically engaged by the need to select among competing response alternatives. These findings support the idea that parietal cortex is involved in activating possible responses on the basis of learned stimulus-response associations, and that prefrontal cortex is recruited when there is a need to select between competing responses.

The Cognitive and Neural Architecture of Sequence Representation

The authors theorize that 2 neurocognitive sequence-learning systems can be distinguished in serial reaction time experiments, one dorsal (parietal and supplementary motor cortex) and the other ventral (temporal and lateral prefrontal cortex). Dorsal system learning is implicit and associates noncategorized stimuli within dimensional modules. Ventral system learning can be implicit or explicit It also allows associating events across dimensions and therefore is the basis of cross-task integration or interference, depending on degree of cross-task correlation of signals. Accordingly, lack of correlation rather than limited capacity is responsible for dual-task effects on learning. The theory is relevant to issues of attentional effects on learning; the representational basis of complex, sequential skills; hippocampal-versus basal ganglia-based learning; procedural versus declarative memory; and implicit versus explicit memory.

Motor sequence learning with the nondominant left hand. A PET functional imaging study.

Whereas the human right hemisphere is active during execution of contralateral hand movements, the left hemisphere is engaged for both contra- and ipsilateral movements, at least for right-handed subjects. Whether this asymmetry is also found during motor learning remains unknown. Implicit sequence learning by the nondominant left hand was examined with the serial reaction time (SRT) task during functional brain imaging. As learning progressed, increases in brain activity were observed in left lateral premotor cortex (PMC) and bilaterally in supplementary motor areas (SMA), with the increase significantly greater in the left hemisphere. The left SMA site was similar to one previously identified with right-hand learning, suggesting that this region is critical for representing a sequence independent of effector. Learning with the left hand also recruited a widespread set of temporal and frontal regions, suggesting that motor skill learning with the nondominant hand develops within both cognitive and motor-related functional networks. After skill acquisition, subjects performed the SRT task with their right hands, and sequence transfer was tested with the original and a mirror-ordered sequence. With the original sequence, the stimulus sequence and series of response locations remained unchanged, but the finger movements were different. With the mirror-ordered sequence, the response sequence involved finger movements homologous to those used during training. Performance of the original and mirror sequence by the right hand was significantly better than with random stimuli. Mirror transformation of the sequence by the right hand was associated with a marked increase in regional activity in the left motor cortex, consistent with a role for sequential transformation at this level of the motor output pathway.

Neural Activation During Response Competition

The flanker task, introduced by Eriksen and Eriksen [Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149], provides a means to selectively manipulate the presence or absence of response competition while keeping other task demands constant. We measured brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during performance of the flanker task. In accordance with previous behavioral studies, trials in which the flanking stimuli indicated a different response than the central stimulus were performed significantly more slowly than trials in which all the stimuli indicated the same response. This reaction time effect was accompanied by increases in activity in four regions: the right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, the supplementary motor area, the left superior parietal lobe, and the left anterior parietal cortex. The increases were not due to changes in stimulus complexity or the need to overcome previously learned associations between stimuli and responses. Correspondences between this study and other experiments manipulating response interference suggest that the frontal foci may be related to response inhibition processes whereas the posterior foci may be related to the activation of representations of the inappropriate responses.

Neural fate of seen and unseen faces in visuospatial neglect: A combined event-related functional MRI and event-related potential study

To compare neural activity produced by visual events that escape or reach conscious awareness, we used event-related MRI and evoked potentials in a patient who had neglect and extinction after focal right parietal damage, but intact visual fields. This neurological disorder entails a loss of awareness for stimuli in the field contralateral to a brain lesion when stimuli are simultaneously presented on the ipsilateral side, even though early visual areas may be intact, and single contralateral stimuli may still be perceived. Functional MRI and event-related potential study were performed during a task where faces or shapes appeared in the right, left, or both fields. Unilateral stimuli produced normal responses in V1 and extrastriate areas. In bilateral events, left faces that were not perceived still activated right V1 and inferior temporal cortex and evoked nonsignificantly reduced N1 potentials, with preserved face-specific negative potentials at 170 ms. When left faces were perceived, the same stimuli produced greater activity in a distributed network of areas including right V1 and cuneus, bilateral fusiform gyri, and left parietal cortex. Also, effective connectivity between visual, parietal, and frontal areas increased during perception of faces. These results suggest that activity can occur in V1 and ventral temporal cortex without awareness, whereas coupling with dorsal parietal and frontal areas may be critical for such activity to afford conscious perception.

Callosotomy patients exhibit temporal uncoupling during continuous bimanual movements

Rhythmic bimanual movements are highly constrained in the temporal domain, with the gestures of the two hands tightly synchronized. Previous studies have implicated a subcortical locus for temporal coupling based on the observation that these constraints persist in callosotomy patients. We now report that such coupling is restricted to movements entailing a discrete event (such as a movement onset). Three callosotomy patients exhibited a striking lack of temporal coupling during continuous movements, with the two hands oscillating at non-identical frequencies. We propose a subcortical locus of temporal coupling for movements involving discrete events. In contrast, synchronization between the hands during continuous movements depends on interhemispheric transmission across the corpus callosum.

Simultaneous Dual-Task Performance Reveals Parallel Response Selection After Practice

E. H. Schumacher, T. L. Seymour, J. M. Glass, D. E. Kieras, and D. E. Meyer (2001) reported that dual-task costs are minimal when participants are practiced and give the 2 tasks equal emphasis. The present research examined whether such findings are compatible with the operation of an efficient response selection bottleneck. Participants trained until they were able to perform both tasks simultaneously without interference. Novel stimulus pairs produced no reaction time costs, arguing against the development of compound stimulus-response associations (Experiment 1). Manipulating the relative onsets (Experiments 2 and 4) and durations (Experiments 3 and 4) of response selection processes did not lead to dual-task costs. The results indicate that the 2 tasks did not share a bottleneck after practice.

Mental spatial transformations of objects and perspective

This study sought evidence for the independenceof two classes of mental spatialtransformation: object-based spatialtransformations and egocentric perspectivetransformations. Two tasks were designed toselectively elicit these two transformationsusing the same materials, participants, andtask parameters: one required same-differentjudgments about pairs of pictures, while theother required left-right judgments aboutsingle pictures. For pictures of human bodies,the two tasks showed strikingly differentpatterns of response time as a function ofstimulus orientation. Moreover, acrossindividuals, the two tasks had differentrelationships to psychometric tests of spatialability. The chronometric and individualdifference data converge withneuropsychological and neuroimaging data insuggesting that different mental spatialtransformations are performed by dissociableneural systems.

The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: evidence for content-dependent central interference.

Recent debate regarding dual-task performance has focused on whether costs result from limitations in central capacity, and whether central operations can be performed in parallel. While these questions are controversial, the dominant models of dual-task performance share the assumption that central operations are generic--that is, their interactions are independent of stimulus and response modalities. To examine these issues, we conducted a series of dual-task experiments with different input and output modality pairings. One condition combined a visual-manual task with an auditory-vocal task, and the other condition reversed the input-output pairings, combining a visual-vocal task with an auditory-manual task. Input/output modality pairings proved to be a key factor; throughout practice, dual-task costs were generally more than twice as large with visual-vocal/auditory-manual tasks than with the opposite arrangement of modalities (Experiments 1 and 2). These differences could be explained neither by competition for peripheral resources nor by differences in single-task response times (Experiment 3). Moreover, the persistent dual-task costs did not appear to stem from a central bottleneck. Contrary to the dominant models of dual-task performance, we propose that central interference between tasks depends not just on the duration of central operations, nor just strategic adaptation, but also on the content of those operations. Implications for structural and strategic accounts of dual-task interference are discussed.