Action Enhances Predicted Touch

Predictions and errors are distinctly represented across V1 layers

Popular accounts of mind and brain propose that the brain continuously forms predictions about future sensory inputs and combines predictions with inputs to determine what we perceive.1,2,3,4,5,6 Under "predictive processing" schemes, such integration is supported by the hierarchical organization of the cortex, whereby feedback connections communicate predictions from higher-level deep layers to agranular (superficial and deep) lower-level layers.7,8,9,10 Predictions are compared with input to compute the "prediction error," which is transmitted up the hierarchy from superficial layers of lower cortical regions to the middle layers of higher areas, to update higher-level predictions until errors are reconciled.11,12,13,14,15 In the primary visual cortex (V1), predictions have thereby been proposed to influence representations in deep layers while error signals may be computed in superficial layers. Despite the framework's popularity, there is little evidence for these functional distinctions because, to our knowledge, unexpected sensory events have not previously been presented in human laminar paradigms to contrast against expected events. To this end, this 7T fMRI study contrasted V1 responses to expected (75% likely) and unexpected (25%) Gabor orientations. Multivariate decoding analyses revealed an interaction between expectation and layer, such that expected events could be decoded with comparable accuracy across layers, while unexpected events could only be decoded in superficial laminae. Although these results are in line with these accounts that have been popular for decades, such distinctions have not previously been demonstrated in humans. We discuss how both prediction and error processes may operate together to shape our unitary perceptual experiences.

Prior probability cues bias sensory encoding with increasing task exposure

When observers have prior knowledge about the likely outcome of their perceptual decisions, they exhibit robust behavioural biases in reaction time and choice accuracy. Computational modelling typically attributes these effects to strategic adjustments in the criterion amount of evidence required to commit to a choice alternative - usually implemented by a starting point shift - but recent work suggests that expectations may also fundamentally bias the encoding of the sensory evidence itself. Here, we recorded neural activity with EEG while participants performed a contrast discrimination task with valid, invalid, or neutral probabilistic cues across multiple testing sessions. We measured sensory evidence encoding via contrast-dependent steady-state visual-evoked potentials (SSVEP), while a read-out of criterion adjustments was provided by effector-selective mu-beta band activity over motor cortex. In keeping with prior modelling and neural recording studies, cues evoked substantial biases in motor preparation consistent with criterion adjustments, but we additionally found that the cues produced a significant modulation of the SSVEP during evidence presentation. While motor preparation adjustments were observed in the earliest trials, the sensory-level effects only emerged with extended task exposure. Our results suggest that, in addition to strategic adjustments to the decision process, probabilistic information can also induce subtle biases in the encoding of the evidence itself.

Augmented action observation: Theory and practical applications in sensorimotor rehabilitation

Sensory feedback is a fundamental aspect of effective motor learning in sport and clinical contexts. One way to provide this is through sensory augmentation, where extrinsic sensory information are associated with, and modulated by, movement. Traditionally, sensory augmentation has been used as an online strategy, where feedback is provided during physical execution of an action. In this article, we argue that action observation can be an additional effective channel to provide augmented feedback, which would be complementary to other, more traditional, motor learning and sensory augmentation strategies. Given these similarities between observing and executing an action, action observation could be used when physical training is difficult or not feasible, for example during immobilization or during the initial stages of a rehabilitation protocol when peripheral fatigue is a common issue. We review the benefits of observational learning and preliminary evidence for the effectiveness of using augmented action observation to improve learning. We also highlight current knowledge gaps which make the transition from laboratory to practical contexts difficult. Finally, we highlight the key areas of focus for future research.

Action does not enhance but attenuates predicted touch

Dominant motor control theories propose that the brain predicts and attenuates the somatosensory consequences of actions, referred to as somatosensory attenuation. Support comes from psychophysical and neuroimaging studies showing that touch applied on a passive hand elicits attenuated perceptual and neural responses if it is actively generated by one's other hand, compared to an identical touch from an external origin. However, recent experimental findings have challenged this view by providing psychophysical evidence that the perceived intensity of touch on the passive hand is enhanced if the active hand does not receive touch simultaneously with the passive hand (somatosensory enhancement) and by further attributing attenuation to the double tactile stimulation of the hands upon contact. Here, we directly contrasted the hypotheses of the attenuation and enhancement models regarding how action influences somatosensory perception by manipulating whether the active hand contacts the passive hand. We further assessed somatosensory perception in the absence of any predictive cues in a condition that turned out to be essential for interpreting the experimental findings. In three pre-registered experiments, we demonstrate that action does not enhance the predicted touch (Experiment 1), that the previously reported 'enhancement' effects are driven by the reference condition used (Experiment 2), and that self-generated touch is robustly attenuated regardless of whether the two hands make contact (Experiment 3). Our results provide conclusive evidence that action does not enhance but attenuates predicted touch and prompt a reappraisal of recent experimental findings upon which theoretical frameworks proposing a perceptual enhancement by action prediction are based.

Exploring the internal forward model: action-effect prediction and attention in sensorimotor processing

Action-effect predictions are believed to facilitate movement based on its association with sensory objectives and suppress the neurophysiological response to self- versus externally generated stimuli (i.e. sensory attenuation). However, research is needed to explore theorized differences in the use of action-effect prediction based on whether movement is uncued (i.e. volitional) or in response to external cues (i.e. stimulus-driven). While much of the sensory attenuation literature has examined effects involving the auditory N1, evidence is also conflicted regarding this component's sensitivity to action-effect prediction. In this study (n = 64), we explored the influence of action-effect contingency on event-related potentials associated with visually cued and uncued movement, as well as resultant stimuli. Our findings replicate recent evidence demonstrating reduced N1 amplitude for tones produced by stimulus-driven movement. Despite influencing motor preparation, action-effect contingency was not found to affect N1 amplitudes. Instead, we explore electrophysiological markers suggesting that attentional mechanisms may suppress the neurophysiological response to sound produced by stimulus-driven movement. Our findings demonstrate lateralized parieto-occipital activity that coincides with the auditory N1, corresponds to a reduction in its amplitude, and is topographically consistent with documented effects of attentional suppression. These results provide new insights into sensorimotor coordination and potential mechanisms underlying sensory attenuation.

Perception of self-generated and externally-generated visual stimuli: Evidence from EEG and behavior

Efference copy-based forward model mechanisms may help us to distinguish between self-generated and externally-generated sensory consequences. Previous studies have shown that self-initiation modulates neural and perceptual responses to identical stimulation. For example, event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by tones that follow a button press are reduced in amplitude relative to ERPs elicited by passively attended tones. However, previous EEG studies investigating visual stimuli in this context are rare, provide inconclusive results, and lack adequate control conditions with passive movements. Furthermore, although self-initiation is known to modulate behavioral responses, it is not known whether differences in the amplitude of ERPs also reflect differences in perception of sensory outcomes. In this study, we presented to participants visual stimuli consisting of gray discs following either active button presses, or passive button presses, in which an electromagnet moved the participant's finger. Two discs presented visually 500-1250 ms apart followed each button press, and participants judged which of the two was more intense. Early components of the primary visual response (N1 and P2) over the occipital electrodes were suppressed in the active condition. Interestingly, suppression in the intensity judgment task was only correlated with suppression of the visual P2 component. These data support the notion of efference copy-based forward model predictions in the visual sensory modality, but especially later processes (P2) seem to be perceptually relevant. Taken together, the results challenge the assumption that N1 differences reflect perceptual suppression and emphasize the relevance of the P2 ERP component.

Updating perceptual expectations as certainty diminishes

Forming expectations about what we are likely to perceive often facilitates perception. We forge such expectations on the basis of strong statistical relationships between events in our environment. However, due to our ever-changing world these relationships often subsequently degrade or even disappear, yet it is unclear how these altered statistics influence perceptual expectations. We examined this question across two studies by training participants in perfect relationships between actions (index or little finger abductions) and outcomes (clockwise or counter-clockwise gratings), before degrading the predictive relationship in a test phase - such that 'expected' events followed actions on 50-75% of trials and 'unexpected' events ensued on the remainder. Perceptual decisions about outcomes were faster and less error prone on expected than unexpected trials when predictive relationships remained high and reduced as the relationship diminished. Drift diffusion modelling indicated that these effects are explained by shifting the starting point in the evidence accumulation process as well as biasing the rate of evidence accumulation - with the former reflecting biases from statistics within the training session and the latter those of the test session. These findings demonstrate how perceptual expectations are updated as statistical certainty diminishes, with interacting influences speculatively dependent upon learning consolidation. We discuss how underlying mechanisms optimise the interaction between learning and perception - allowing our experiences to reflect a nuanced, ever-changing environment.

Cancelling cancellation? Sensorimotor control, agency, and prediction

For decades, classic theories of action control and action awareness have been built around the idea that the brain predictively 'cancels' expected action outcomes from perception. However, recent research casts doubt over this basic premise. What do these new findings mean for classic accounts of action? Should we now 'cancel' old data, theories and approaches generated under this idea? In this paper, we argue 'No'. While doubts about predictive cancellation may urge us to fundamentally rethink how predictions shape perception, the wider pyramid using these ideas to explain action control and agentic experiences can remain largely intact. Some adaptive functions assigned to predictive cancellation can be achieved through quasi-predictive processes, that influence perception without actively tracking the probabilistic structure of the environment. Other functions may rely upon truly predictive processes, but not require that these predictions cancel perception. Appreciating the role of these processes may help us to move forward in explaining how agents optimise their interactions with the external world, even if predictive cancellation is cancelled from theory.

Neural processing of self-touch and other-touch in anorexia nervosa and autism spectrum condition

INTRODUCTION

The tactile sense plays a crucial role in the development and maintenance of a functional bodily self. The ability to differentiate between self- and nonself-generated touch contributes to the perception of the bodies' boundaries and more generally to self-other-distinction, both of which are thought be altered in anorexia nervosa (AN) and autism spectrum condition (AS). While it has been suggested that AN and AS are characterized by overlapping symptomatology, they might differ regarding body perception and self-other-distinction.

METHODS

Participants with a diagnosis of AN (n = 25), AS (n = 29), and a comparison group without diagnoses (n = 57) performed a self-other-touch task during functional brain imaging. In the experimental conditions, they stroked their own arm or were stroked on the arm by an experimenter.

RESULTS

As shown previously, the CG group showed lower activation or deactivation in response to self-touch compared to social touch from someone else. A main group effect was found in areas including somatosensory cortex, frontal and temporal gyri, insula, and subcortical regions. This was driven by increased activations in participants with AN, while participants in the AS group showed mostly comparable activations to the comparison group.

CONCLUSIONS

AN diagnosis was associated with an increased neural activity in response to both self-touch and social touch. Failure to attenuate self-touch might relate to altered predictions regarding the own body and reduced perception of bodily boundaries. Participants with an AS diagnosis were mostly comparable to the comparison group, potentially indicating unaltered tactile self-other-distinction.

Emergence of sensory attenuation based upon the free-energy principle

The brain attenuates its responses to self-produced exteroceptions (e.g., we cannot tickle ourselves). Is this phenomenon, known as sensory attenuation, enabled innately, or acquired through learning? Here, our simulation study using a multimodal hierarchical recurrent neural network model, based on variational free-energy minimization, shows that a mechanism for sensory attenuation can develop through learning of two distinct types of sensorimotor experience, involving self-produced or externally produced exteroceptions. For each sensorimotor context, a particular free-energy state emerged through interaction between top-down prediction with precision and bottom-up sensory prediction error from each sensory area. The executive area in the network served as an information hub. Consequently, shifts between the two sensorimotor contexts triggered transitions from one free-energy state to another in the network via executive control, which caused shifts between attenuating and amplifying prediction-error-induced responses in the sensory areas. This study situates emergence of sensory attenuation (or self-other distinction) in development of distinct free-energy states in the dynamic hierarchical neural system.

Predictive attenuation of touch and tactile gating are distinct perceptual phenomena

In recent decades, research on somatosensory perception has led to two important observations. First, self-generated touches that are predicted by voluntary movements become attenuated compared with externally generated touches of the same intensity (attenuation). Second, externally generated touches feel weaker and are more difficult to detect during movement than at rest (gating). At present, researchers often consider gating and attenuation the same suppression process; however, this assumption is unwarranted because, despite more than 40 years of research, no study has combined them in a single paradigm. We quantified how people perceive self-generated and externally generated touches during movement and rest. We show that whereas voluntary movement gates the precision of both self-generated and externally generated touch, the amplitude of self-generated touch is robustly attenuated compared with externally generated touch. Furthermore, attenuation and gating do not interact and are not correlated, and we conclude that they represent distinct perceptual phenomena.

•

We tested the perception of self-generated and external touch during movement and rest

•

The intensity of self-generated touch is reduced during movement and rest (attenuation)

•

The precision of self-generated and external touch is reduced during movement (gating)

•

Attenuation and gating neither interact nor correlate, and are distinct phenomena