Neural Modulation by Regularity and Passage of Time

Abstract

The current study tested whether multiple rhythms could flexibly induce temporal expectations (temporal orienting) and whether these expectations interact with temporal expectations associated with the passage of time (foreperiod effects). A visual stimulus that moved following a regular rhythm was temporarily occluded for a variable duration (occlusion foreperiod). The task involved making a speeded perceptual discrimination about the target stimulus that reappeared after the occlusion. Temporal-orienting effects were measured by comparing performance and event-related potentials on conditions in which the timing for target reappearance was predictable (valid) versus unpredictable (invalid) according to the rhythm. Foreperiod effects were measured by comparing conditions in which the target was occluded for progressively longer periods of time (short, medium, and long foreperiods) and hence were increasingly predictable. The results showed strong interactions between temporal orienting and foreperiod effects during the facilitation of behavior and neural activity associated with late perceptual and response selection processes. Temporal orienting attenuated the N2 amplitude and decreased the P3 latency only at short foreperiods. Temporal preparation related to foreperiod effects abolished temporal orienting effects at medium and long foreperiods. Likewise, foreperiod effects attenuated the N1 and N2 amplitudes and decreased the P3 latency only in the invalid orienting condition as preparation related to temporal orienting abolished foreperiod effects in the valid condition. This high degree of neural overlap between the effects of temporal orienting driven by rhythms and foreperiod effects associated with the passage of time suggests the involvement of a common mechanism for temporal preparation.

Uncovering the Neural Signature of Lapsing Attention: Electrophysiological Signals Predict Errors up to 20 s before They Occur

“…The analysis of the target trial for hits is revealing in that a component with the same temporal and topographical characteristics as the standard P3 was elicited during the additional target trial duration in the absence of any stimulus changeover. Previous studies of rhythm perception have pointed to a link between increased P3 amplitudes and improved timing (Jongsma et al, 2007;Correa and Nobre, 2008). The fact that a fron-tal P3 was elicited during the target interval in the absence of a stimulus change indicates that this component is not stimulus driven but represents an active endogenous mechanism that traces the temporal structure of the task (Busse and Woldorff, 2003).…”

Effects of temporal trial-by-trial cuing on early and late stages of auditory processing: Evidence from event-related potentials

“…Mean voltages were calculated for seven successive 40-ms epochs, starting 320 ms after the cue for the short interval and 920 ms after the cue for the long interval. To minimize misalignment of the waveforms based on the CNV-activity, the baseline was set from 0 to 50 ms relative to the target for target-related ERPs (Correa et al, 2006;Correa & Nobre, 2008). On the basis of a visual inspection of the grand average waveforms, the N1 was quantified as the mean voltage in the interval between 100 and 140 ms after target-onset.…”

“…It is unlikely, though, that the more negative N1 to attended nontargets was due to the difference in the preceding slow wave. The enhanced N1 was obtained with a strict baseline, set from 0 to 50 ms, which should reduce the impact of the slow wave on the N1 (e.g., Correa et al, 2006;Correa & Nobre, 2008;Griffin et al, 2002). More important, the attention effect in the slow wave and the N1 attention effect could be separated topographically, thus suggesting that the two effects do not reflect identical processes (see also Lange et al, 2003).…”

Rhythmic context modulates foreperiod effects

“…Advantages of temporal preparation are found in time judgment/discrimination tasks using FP designs (Bausenhart, Rolke, & Ulrich, 2008;Correa, Sanabria, Spence, Tudela, & Lupiáñez, 2006;Grondin & Rammsayer, 2003). In tasks in which rhythm implicitly drives temporal expectancies, accuracy for on-time targets increases (Correa & Nobre, 2008;Jones, Boltz, & Kidd, 1982;Martin et al, 2005;Olson & Chun, 2001) and time judgment/discrimination improves (Barnes & Jones, 2000;Large & Jones, 1999;McAuley & Jones, 2003;McAuley & Kidd, 1998). A common explanatory construct is temporally guided attending.…”

“…Few systematic manipulations of other temporal aspects of these distributions have been examined. Other than Martin et al (2005, Experiment 3), manipulations of rhythmic context have been confined to isochronous (Correa & Nobre, 2008;Martin et al, 2005, Experiment 1;Requin et al, 1973) or isochronous versus irregular rhythms (Doherty, Rao, Mesulam, & Nobre, 2005;Olson & Chun, 2001), which differ markedly in their statistical, grouping, and metrical properties. Accordingly, we asked what happens if temporal contexts differ in rhythmic coherence but retain a common probability structure.…”