1
|
Saccenti D, Moro AS, Sassaroli S, Malgaroli A, Ferro M, Lamanna J. Neural correlates of metacognition: Disentangling the brain circuits underlying prospective and retrospective second-order judgments through noninvasive brain stimulation. J Neurosci Res 2024; 102:e25330. [PMID: 38622870 DOI: 10.1002/jnr.25330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2023] [Revised: 02/05/2024] [Accepted: 03/30/2024] [Indexed: 04/17/2024]
Abstract
Metacognition encompasses the capability to monitor and control one's cognitive processes, with metamemory and metadecision configuring among the most studied higher order functions. Although imaging experiments evaluated the role of disparate brain regions, neural substrates of metacognitive judgments remain undetermined. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and discuss the available evidence concerning the neural bases of metacognition which has been collected by assessing the effects of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on human subjects' metacognitive capacities. Based on such literature analysis, our goal is, at first, to verify whether prospective and retrospective second-order judgments are localized within separate brain circuits and, subsequently, to provide compelling clues useful for identifying new targets for future NIBS studies. The search was conducted following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines among PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PSYNDEX, MEDLINE, and ERIC databases. Overall, 25 studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding a total of 36 experiments employing transcranial magnetic stimulation and 16 ones making use of transcranial electrical stimulation techniques, including transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial alternating current stimulation. Importantly, we found that both perspective and retrospective judgments about both memory and perceptual decision-making performances depend on the activation of the anterior and lateral portions of the prefrontal cortex, as well as on the activity of more caudal regions such as the premotor cortex and the precuneus. Combining this evidence with results from previous imaging and lesion studies, we advance ventromedial prefrontal cortex as a promising target for future NIBS studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniele Saccenti
- Department of Psychology, Sigmund Freud University, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Stefano Moro
- Department of Psychology, Sigmund Freud University, Milan, Italy
- Center for Behavioral Neuroscience and Communication (BNC), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Sandra Sassaroli
- Department of Psychology, Sigmund Freud University, Milan, Italy
- Studi Cognitivi, Cognitive Psychotherapy School and Research Center, Milan, Italy
| | - Antonio Malgaroli
- Center for Behavioral Neuroscience and Communication (BNC), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
- Faculty of Psychology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Mattia Ferro
- Department of Psychology, Sigmund Freud University, Milan, Italy
- Center for Behavioral Neuroscience and Communication (BNC), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Jacopo Lamanna
- Center for Behavioral Neuroscience and Communication (BNC), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
- Faculty of Psychology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
TMS Does Not Increase BOLD Activity at the Site of Stimulation: A Review of All Concurrent TMS-fMRI Studies. eNeuro 2022; 9:9/4/ENEURO.0163-22.2022. [PMID: 35981879 PMCID: PMC9410768 DOI: 10.1523/eneuro.0163-22.2022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is widely used for understanding brain function in neurologically intact subjects and for the treatment of various disorders. However, the precise neurophysiological effects of TMS at the site of stimulation remain poorly understood. The local effects of TMS can be studied using concurrent TMS-functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a technique where TMS is delivered during fMRI scanning. However, although concurrent TMS-fMRI was developed over 20 years ago and dozens of studies have used this technique, there is still no consensus on whether TMS increases blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) activity at the site of stimulation. To address this question, here we review all previous concurrent TMS-fMRI studies that reported analyses of BOLD activity at the target location. We find evidence that TMS increases local BOLD activity when stimulating the primary motor (M1) and visual (V1) cortices but that these effects are likely driven by the downstream consequences of TMS (finger twitches and phosphenes). However, TMS does not appear to increase BOLD activity at the site of stimulation for areas outside of the M1 and V1 when conducted at rest. We examine the possible reasons for such lack of BOLD signal increase based on recent work in nonhuman animals. We argue that the current evidence points to TMS inducing periods of increased and decreased neuronal firing that mostly cancel each other out and therefore lead to no change in the overall BOLD signal.
Collapse
|
3
|
Mizutani-Tiebel Y, Tik M, Chang KY, Padberg F, Soldini A, Wilkinson Z, Voon CC, Bulubas L, Windischberger C, Keeser D. Concurrent TMS-fMRI: Technical Challenges, Developments, and Overview of Previous Studies. Front Psychiatry 2022; 13:825205. [PMID: 35530029 PMCID: PMC9069063 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.825205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 03/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising treatment modality for psychiatric and neurological disorders. Repetitive TMS (rTMS) is widely used for the treatment of psychiatric and neurological diseases, such as depression, motor stroke, and neuropathic pain. However, the underlying mechanisms of rTMS-mediated neuronal modulation are not fully understood. In this respect, concurrent or simultaneous TMS-fMRI, in which TMS is applied during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), is a viable tool to gain insights, as it enables an investigation of the immediate effects of TMS. Concurrent application of TMS during neuroimaging usually causes severe artifacts due to magnetic field inhomogeneities induced by TMS. However, by carefully interleaving the TMS pulses with MR signal acquisition in the way that these are far enough apart, we can avoid any image distortions. While the very first feasibility studies date back to the 1990s, recent developments in coil hardware and acquisition techniques have boosted the number of TMS-fMRI applications. As such, a concurrent application requires expertise in both TMS and MRI mechanisms and sequencing, and the hurdle of initial technical set up and maintenance remains high. This review gives a comprehensive overview of concurrent TMS-fMRI techniques by collecting (1) basic information, (2) technical challenges and developments, (3) an overview of findings reported so far using concurrent TMS-fMRI, and (4) current limitations and our suggestions for improvement. By sharing this review, we hope to attract the interest of researchers from various backgrounds and create an educational knowledge base.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuki Mizutani-Tiebel
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Martin Tik
- High Field MR Center, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Kai-Yen Chang
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Frank Padberg
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Aldo Soldini
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,International Max Planck Research School for Translational Psychiatry, Munich, Germany
| | - Zane Wilkinson
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Cui Ci Voon
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| | - Lucia Bulubas
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,International Max Planck Research School for Translational Psychiatry, Munich, Germany
| | - Christian Windischberger
- High Field MR Center, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Daniel Keeser
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Neuroimaging Core Unit Munich - NICUM, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiology, University Hospital LMU, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bergmann TO, Varatheeswaran R, Hanlon CA, Madsen KH, Thielscher A, Siebner HR. Concurrent TMS-fMRI for causal network perturbation and proof of target engagement. Neuroimage 2021; 237:118093. [PMID: 33940146 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2021] [Revised: 04/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The experimental manipulation of neural activity by neurostimulation techniques overcomes the inherent limitations of correlative recordings, enabling the researcher to investigate causal brain-behavior relationships. But only when stimulation and recordings are combined, the direct impact of the stimulation on neural activity can be evaluated. In humans, this can be achieved non-invasively through the concurrent combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Concurrent TMS-fMRI allows the assessment of the neurovascular responses evoked by TMS with excellent spatial resolution and full-brain coverage. This enables the functional mapping of both local and remote network effects of TMS in cortical as well as deep subcortical structures, offering unique opportunities for basic research and clinical applications. The purpose of this review is to introduce the reader to this powerful tool. We will introduce the technical challenges and state-of-the art solutions and provide a comprehensive overview of the existing literature and the available experimental approaches. We will highlight the unique insights that can be gained from concurrent TMS-fMRI, including the state-dependent assessment of neural responsiveness and inter-regional effective connectivity, the demonstration of functional target engagement, and the systematic evaluation of stimulation parameters. We will also discuss how concurrent TMS-fMRI during a behavioral task can help to link behavioral TMS effects to changes in neural network activity and to identify peripheral co-stimulation confounds. Finally, we will review the use of concurrent TMS-fMRI for developing TMS treatments of psychiatric and neurological disorders and suggest future improvements for further advancing the application of concurrent TMS-fMRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Til Ole Bergmann
- Neuroimaging Center (NIC), Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN), Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany; Leibniz Institute for Resilience Research, Wallstraße 7-9, 55122, Mainz, Germany.
| | - Rathiga Varatheeswaran
- Neuroimaging Center (NIC), Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN), Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany; Leibniz Institute for Resilience Research, Wallstraße 7-9, 55122, Mainz, Germany
| | - Colleen A Hanlon
- Department of Cancer Biology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, 1 Medical Center Blvd., Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA
| | - Kristoffer H Madsen
- Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegård Allé 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark; Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
| | - Axel Thielscher
- Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegård Allé 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark; Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
| | - Hartwig Roman Siebner
- Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegård Allé 30, 2650, Hvidovre, Denmark; Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, 2400 København NV, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B, 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zuanazzi A, Noppeney U. The Intricate Interplay of Spatial Attention and Expectation: a Multisensory Perspective. Multisens Res 2020; 33:383-416. [DOI: 10.1163/22134808-20201482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2019] [Accepted: 12/07/2019] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Attention (i.e., task relevance) and expectation (i.e., signal probability) are two critical top-down mechanisms guiding perceptual inference. Attention prioritizes processing of information that is relevant for observers’ current goals. Prior expectations encode the statistical structure of the environment. Research to date has mostly conflated spatial attention and expectation. Most notably, the Posner cueing paradigm manipulates spatial attention using probabilistic cues that indicate where the subsequent stimulus is likely to be presented. Only recently have studies attempted to dissociate the mechanisms of attention and expectation and characterized their interactive (i.e., synergistic) or additive influences on perception. In this review, we will first discuss methodological challenges that are involved in dissociating the mechanisms of attention and expectation. Second, we will review research that was designed to dissociate attention and expectation in the unisensory domain. Third, we will review the broad field of crossmodal endogenous and exogenous spatial attention that investigates the impact of attention across the senses. This raises the critical question of whether attention relies on amodal or modality-specific mechanisms. Fourth, we will discuss recent studies investigating the role of both spatial attention and expectation in multisensory perception, where the brain constructs a representation of the environment based on multiple sensory inputs. We conclude that spatial attention and expectation are closely intertwined in almost all circumstances of everyday life. Yet, despite their intimate relationship, attention and expectation rely on partly distinct neural mechanisms: while attentional resources are mainly shared across the senses, expectations can be formed in a modality-specific fashion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arianna Zuanazzi
- 1Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, UK
- 2Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Uta Noppeney
- 1Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, UK
- 3Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Egocentric processing in the roll plane and dorsal parietal cortex: A TMS-ERP study of the subjective visual vertical. Neuropsychologia 2019; 127:113-122. [DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.02.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2018] [Revised: 01/29/2019] [Accepted: 02/28/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
7
|
Zuanazzi A, Noppeney U. Distinct Neural Mechanisms of Spatial Attention and Expectation Guide Perceptual Inference in a Multisensory World. J Neurosci 2019; 39:2301-2312. [PMID: 30659086 PMCID: PMC6433765 DOI: 10.1523/jneurosci.2873-18.2019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2018] [Revised: 01/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Spatial attention (i.e., task-relevance) and expectation (i.e., signal probability) are two critical top-down mechanisms guiding perceptual inference. Spatial attention prioritizes processing of information at task-relevant locations. Spatial expectations encode the statistical structure of the environment. An unresolved question is how the brain allocates attention and forms expectations in a multisensory environment, where task-relevance and signal probability over space can differ across sensory modalities. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging in human participants (female and male) to investigate whether the brain encodes task-relevance and signal probability over space separately or interactively across sensory modalities. In a novel multisensory paradigm, we manipulated spatial attention and expectation selectively in audition and assessed their effects on behavioral and neural responses to auditory and visual stimuli. Our results show that both auditory and visual stimuli increased activations in a right-lateralized frontoparietal system, when they were presented at locations that were task-irrelevant in audition. Yet, only auditory stimuli increased activations in the medial prefrontal cortex when presented at expected locations and in audiovisual and frontoparietal cortices signaling a prediction error when presented at unexpected locations. This dissociation in multisensory generalization for attention and expectation effects shows that the brain controls attentional resources interactively across the senses but encodes the statistical structure of the environment as spatial expectations independently for each sensory system. Our results demonstrate that spatial attention and expectation engage partly overlapping neural systems via distinct mechanisms to guide perceptual inference in a multisensory world.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT In our natural environment the brain is exposed to a constant influx of signals through all our senses. How does the brain allocate attention and form spatial expectations in this multisensory environment? Because observers need to respond to stimuli regardless of their sensory modality, they may allocate attentional resources and encode the probability of events jointly across the senses. This psychophysics and neuroimaging study shows that the brain controls attentional resources interactively across the senses via a frontoparietal system but encodes the statistical structure of the environment independently for each sense in sensory and frontoparietal areas. Thus, spatial attention and expectation engage partly overlapping neural systems via distinct mechanisms to guide perceptual inference in a multisensory world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arianna Zuanazzi
- Computational Cognitive Neuroimaging Laboratory, Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, B15 2TT Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Uta Noppeney
- Computational Cognitive Neuroimaging Laboratory, Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, B15 2TT Birmingham, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|