Self-control during response conflict by human supplementary eye field

Husain, Masud; Parton, Andrew; Hodgson, Timothy L.; Mort, Dominic; Rees, Geraint

doi:10.1038/nn1005

Cited by 85 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may still be functional, however, since the Go action can be delayed compared with the Nogo action. Although not shown in this diagram, cortico-cortical connections from the pre-SMA to the prefrontal areas including the supplementary eye field may serve as the Go mechanism (Husain et al, 2003;Nachev et al, 2005;Stuphorn and Schall, 2006). These possibilities are testable using our experimental paradigm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Brain mechanisms for switching from automatic to controlled eye movements

Hikosaka¹,

Isoda²

2008

Progress in Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human behaviour is mostly composed of habitual actions that require little conscious control. Such actions may become invalid if the environment changes, at which point we need to switch behaviour by overcoming habitual actions that are otherwise triggered automatically. It is unclear how the brain controls this type of behavioural switching. Here we show that the presupplementary motor area (pre-SMA) in the medial frontal cortex has a function in switching from automatic to volitionally controlled action. This was demonstrated using colour-matching saccade tasks performed by rhesus monkeys. We found that a group of pre-SMA neurons was selectively activated when subjects successfully switched from a habitual saccade to a controlled alternative saccade. Electrical stimulation in the pre-SMA replaced automatic incorrect saccades with slower correct saccades. A further test suggested that the pre-SMA enabled switching by first suppressing an automatic unwanted saccade and then boosting a controlled desired saccade. Our data suggest that the pre-SMA resolves response conflict so that the desired action can be selected. Possible neuronal circuits through which the pre-SMA might exert its switching functions will be discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Brain mechanisms for switching from automatic to controlled eye movements

Hikosaka¹,

Isoda²

2008

Progress in Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Proactive control is defined as the modification of a plan or a decision based on previous experience and in anticipation of forthcoming task demands (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11). It is distinct from reactive control, where an externally presented signal explicitly indicates the required change in plan (16)(17)(18).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By studying changes in the extent of concurrent saccade planning as a function of previous trial type, we show evidence for proactive control in the preparation of sequential movements. Prior knowledge of the goals in a regular environment is known to allow parallel preparation or chunking of movements in a sequence (20,21), whereas error or conflict in the previous trial could favor a more cautious approach toward planning (1,6,8), slowing down preparation of individual movements. Although the first as well as subsequent movements could be slowed down as a result of such performance monitoring, we found contextdependent changes in the preparation of second saccades, independent of the first saccade.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in the case of eye movements, the supplementary eye fields (SEFs) are involved in preparing a saccade in a given trial taking into account information related to preceding trials (1)(2)(3). Such contextual control is pivotal in generating optimal responses in a dynamically changing environment and may derive from signals that are sensitive to conflict or errors in previous trials (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11). Although studies centered on proactive control have so far focused on the regulation of single movements or simple responses, natural behavior typically involves the execution of multiple movements in a sequence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, using functional MRI (fMRI)-guided, single-pulse, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we investigated the role of SEF in the proactive planning of sequential saccades (experiment 2) i.e., whether the SEF is causally involved in embedding contextual information about the previous trial for the preparation of future sequential movements. In the process, we attempt to provide a link between apparently diverse functions of the SEF, such as planning of saccade sequences (12,13) and conflict monitoring (1)(2)(3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Proactive control of sequential saccades in the human supplementary eye field

Sharika

Neggers

Gutteling

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our ability to regulate behavior based on past experience has thus far been examined using single movements. However, natural behavior typically involves a sequence of movements. Here, we examined the effect of previous trial type on the concurrent planning of sequential saccades using a unique paradigm. The task consisted of two trial types: no-shift trials, which implicitly encouraged the concurrent preparation of the second saccade in a subsequent trial; and target-shift trials, which implicitly discouraged the same in the next trial. Using the intersaccadic interval as an index of concurrent planning, we found evidence for contextbased preparation of sequential saccades. We also used functional MRI-guided, single-pulse, transcranial magnetic stimulation on human subjects to test the role of the supplementary eye field (SEF) in the proactive control of sequential eye movements. Results showed that (i) stimulating the SEF in the previous trial disrupted the previous trial type-based preparation of the second saccade in the nonstimulated current trial, (ii) stimulating the SEF in the current trial rectified the disruptive effect caused by stimulation in the previous trial, and (iii) stimulating the SEF facilitated the preparation of second saccades based on previous trial type even when the previous trial was not stimulated. Taken together, we show how the human SEF is causally involved in proactive preparation of sequential saccades.performance monitoring | delayed saccade double-step task | oculomotor | parallel programming | cognitive control T he medial frontal cortex has previously been implicated in our ability to regulate behavior based on past experience. For example, in the case of eye movements, the supplementary eye fields (SEFs) are involved in preparing a saccade in a given trial taking into account information related to preceding trials (1-3). Such contextual control is pivotal in generating optimal responses in a dynamically changing environment and may derive from signals that are sensitive to conflict or errors in previous trials (1-11). Although studies centered on proactive control have so far focused on the regulation of single movements or simple responses, natural behavior typically involves the execution of multiple movements in a sequence. Using a modified version of the classic double-step paradigm called the delayed saccade double-step task, we tested the role of previous trial type in modulating the concurrent planning of sequential eye movements (experiment 1). Also, using functional MRI (fMRI)-guided, single-pulse, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we investigated the role of SEF in the proactive planning of sequential saccades (experiment 2) i.e., whether the SEF is causally involved in embedding contextual information about the previous trial for the preparation of future sequential movements. In the process, we attempt to provide a link between apparently diverse functions of the SEF, such as planning of saccade sequences (12, 13) and conflict monitoring (1-3).The delayed...

show abstract