Two cases requiring external reinforcement in perceptual learning

Seitz, Aaron R.; Náñez, José E.; Holloway, Steve; Tsushima, Yoshiaki; Watanabe, Takeo

doi:10.1167/6.9.9

Cited by 60 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our observation that neural improvements are more pronounced during task performance is consistent with the wellestablished finding that top-down processes known to modulate sensory cortex activity also facilitate and guide PL (12,17,(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43). For our purposes, top-down refers to the functional influence of a higher-order brain region on neural activity in ACx, brought about by task engagement.…”

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Top-down modulation of sensory cortex gates perceptual learning

Caras

Sanes

2017

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

100

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Practice sharpens our perceptual judgments, a process known as perceptual learning. Although several brain regions and neural mechanisms have been proposed to support perceptual learning, formal tests of causality are lacking. Furthermore, the temporal relationship between neural and behavioral plasticity remains uncertain. To address these issues, we recorded the activity of auditory cortical neurons as gerbils trained on a sound detection task. Training led to improvements in cortical and behavioral sensitivity that were closely matched in terms of magnitude and time course. Surprisingly, the degree of neural improvement was behaviorally gated. During task performance, cortical improvements were large and predicted behavioral outcomes. In contrast, during nontask listening sessions, cortical improvements were weak and uncorrelated with perceptual performance. Targeted reduction of auditory cortical activity during training diminished perceptual learning while leaving psychometric performance largely unaffected. Collectively, our findings suggest that training facilitates perceptual learning by strengthening both bottom-up sensory encoding and top-down modulation of auditory cortex.broad range of sensory skills improve with practice during perceptual learning (PL), including language acquisition (1-3), musical abilities (4), and recognition of emotions (5). The neural bases for such perceptual improvement may vary widely. For example, training-based changes in neural activity have been identified in a number of brain regions, including early (6-13) and late (14, 15) sensory cortices, multisensory regions (16, 17), and downstream decision-making areas (18). Similarly, several neural mechanisms have been proposed, such as enhanced signal representation (19), reduction of external (20, 21) or internal (22, 23) noise, and improvement in sensory readout or decision making (13,18,24,25).The apparent divergence of loci and mechanisms associated with PL could be due, in part, to limitations of experimental design. For example, some neural changes associated with PL are transient (26-29), making it necessary to monitor neural activity throughout the duration of perceptual training, rather than making comparisons only after PL is complete (6-12, 14-16, 30). For similar reasons, it is critical to block the function of a specific candidate brain region during training to determine whether it plays a causal role in PL. Although some reports show that manipulating brain activity can influence PL (28,(31)(32)(33)(34), there are no loss-of-function experiments to determine whether a particular region is required for behavioral improvement.To address these unresolved issues, we recorded from auditory cortex (ACx) as animals improved on an auditory detection task and, in separate experiments, blocked ACx activity during the period of perceptual training. We found that neural and behavioral sensitivity improved in a nearly identical manner over the course of training, in terms of both absolute magnitude and kinetics. Furthermore,...

show abstract

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Behavioral evidence suggests that top-down processes, such as attention, arousal, and motivation, can facilitate or enable PL (12,(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43). Here, we adopt the term "top-down" to mean the functional influence of a descending projection from one or more brain regions on neural activity in sensory cortex.…”

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Top-down modulation of sensory cortex gates perceptual learning

Caras

Sanes

2017

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

100

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although some studies have found that feedback is necessary (trial-by-trial; ref. 37) or at least beneficial (blockwise; ref. 38), others have found no effects (trial-by-trial; refs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjective and objective learning effects dissociate in space and in time

Schwiedrzik

Singer

Melloni

2011

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptual learning not only improves sensitivity, but it also changes our subjective experience. However, the question of how these two learning effects relate is largely unexplored. Here we investigate how subjects learn to see initially indiscriminable metacontrast-masked shapes. We find that sensitivity and subjective awareness increase with training. However, sensitivity and subjective awareness dissociate in space: Learning effects on performance are lost when the task is performed at an untrained location in another quadrant, whereas learning effects on subjective awareness are maintained. This finding indicates that improvements in shape sensitivity involve visual areas up to V4, whereas changes in subjective awareness involve other brain regions. Furthermore, subjective awareness dissociates from sensitivity in time: In an early phase of perceptual learning, subjects perform above chance on trials that they rate as subjectively invisible. Later, this phenomenon disappears. Subjective awareness is thus neither necessary nor sufficient for achieving above-chance objective performance.consciousness | psychophysics | Signal Detection Theory O ur perceptual apparatus is constantly shaped by experience. This fact has been shown, for example, in experiments investigating perceptual learning, where practice on a sensory task leads to increases in perceptual sensitivity (1). Although perceptual learning is a well-studied phenomenon, the question of how it changes subjective awareness has rarely been addressed. Do we actually "see more" after training? Apart from anecdotal reports pointing in this direction, a quantitative analysis of the effects of learning on subjective awareness is largely missing (2) because studies in perceptual learning have almost exclusively focused on objective task performance [i.e., sensitivity in terms of signal detection theory (3)]. However, studies from a different line of research, namely those investigating conscious perception, have found that objective performance in a task and awareness of the stimuli on which the task is performed can dissociate. Such is the case in blindsight (4) but also is found in normal observers (refs. 5-7 but see ref. 8). These data demonstrate that these two aspects of perception cannot be treated as being equivalent. We have recently shown that subjects can be trained to perform on and to see stimuli that are initially invisible to them (9). We thus hypothesize that awareness is trainable, a conclusion that is in accordance with recent findings in blindsight patients (10). However, the time course of those learning effects has not been explored, i.e., whether the improvements in sensitivity and subjective awareness depend on each other. In particular, changes in sensitivity could be a prerequisite for changes in subjective awareness. Alternatively, it could be necessary to subjectively see a stimulus in order for changes in sensitivity to occur. Last but not least, training could affect sensitivity and subjective awareness in parallel without any mut...

show abstract

“…that occur through training over time. PL is thought to be an important process that enables us to adapt to our physical environment with experience and time (Seitz, Nanez, Holloway, Tsushima, & Watanabe, 2006). Prior research has shown that PL is sensitive to relevant features (targets) and non-relevant features (distracters) during visual tasks in lower-level processing (texture, shading, and contrast) systems of our visual system (Le Dantec, Melton, & Seitz, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the threshold for stimulation of specific neurons is not attained after initial training). Furthermore, multisensory feedback (audio and visual pairing of feedback about correct vs. incorrect responses) has been shown to facilitate visual learning over unisensory (audio or visual feedback alone) visual training (Seitz, Kim, & Shams, 2006;Seitz et al 2006). Additionally, physical rewards (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural plasticity in lower- and higher-level visual cortex processing

Groth¹

2013

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two cases requiring external reinforcement in perceptual learning

Cited by 60 publications

References 30 publications

Top-down modulation of sensory cortex gates perceptual learning

Top-down modulation of sensory cortex gates perceptual learning

Subjective and objective learning effects dissociate in space and in time

Neural plasticity in lower- and higher-level visual cortex processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About