Background
In the late 19th Century,
the great polymath Hermann von Helmholtz eloquently described how our past
experiences shape how we see the world. Given the optical limitations of the
eye, he concluded that the rich experience of vision must be informed by a lot
more than meets the eye. In particular, he argued that we use our past
experiences to infer the perceptual representation from
the imperfect clues that pass from the outside world to the brain.
Consider the degraded black and
white image below. It is almost impossible to interpret, until you learn that
it is a Dalmatian. Now it is almost impossible not to see the dog in dappled
light.
More than one hundred years after
Helmholtz, we are now starting to understand the brain mechanisms that mediate
this interaction between memory and perception. One important direction follows
directly from Helmholtz 's pioneering work. Often couched in more
contemporary language, such as Bayesian inference, vision scientists are
beginning to understand how our perceptual experience is determined by the
interaction between sensory input and our perceptual
knowledge established through past experience in the world.
Prof Nobre (cognitive
neuroscientist, University of Oxford) has approached this problem from a
slightly different angle. Rather than ask how memory shapes the interpretation
of sensory input, she took one step back to ask how past experience prepares
the visual system to process memory-predicted visual input. With this
move, Nobre's research draws on a rich history of cognitive neuroscientific
research in attention and long-term memory.
Although both attention and memory
have been thoroughly studied in isolation, very is little is actually known of
how these two core cognitive functions interact in everyday life. In 2006,
Nobre and colleagues published the results of a brain imaging experiment
designed to identify the brain areas involved in memory-guided attention (Summerfield et al., 2006, Neuron).
Participants in this experiment first studied a large number of photographs
depicting natural everyday scenes. The instruction was to find a small target
object embedded in each scene, very much like the classic Where's Wally game.
After performing the search task a
number of times, participants were able learned the location of the target in
each scene. When Nobre and her team tested their participants again on a
separate day, they found that people were able to use the familiar scenes to
direct attention to the previously learned target location in the scene.
Next, the research team repeated
this experiment, but this time changes in brain activity were measured in each
participant while they used their memories to direct the focus of their
attention. With functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), the team
found an increase in neural activity in brain areas associated with memory
(especially the hippocampus) as well as a network of brain areas associated
with attention (especially parietal and prefrontal cortex).
The Current Study: Design and Results
In collaboration with Nobre and
colleagues, we combined multiple brain imaging methods to show that past
experience can change the activation state of visual cortex in preparation
for memory-predicted input (Stokes, Atherton, Patai & Nobre, 2012, PNAS). Using electroencephalography (EEG), we demonstrated
that the memories can reduce inhibitory neural oscillations in visual cortex at
memory-specific spatial locations.
With fMRI, we further show that this
change in electrical activity is also associated with an increase in activity
for the brain areas that represent the memory-predicted spatial location.
Together, these results provide key convergent evidence that past-experience
alone can shape activity in visual cortex to optimise processing of
memory-predicted information.
Finally, we were also able to provide
the most compelling evidence to date that memory-guided attention is mediated
via the interaction between processing in the hippocampus, prefrontal and
parietal cortex. However, further research is needed to verify this further
speculation. In particular, we cannot yet confirm whether activation of the
attention network is necessary for memory-guided preparation of
visual cortex, or whether a direct pathway between the hippocampus and visual
cortex is sufficient for the changes in preparatory activity observed with fMRI
and EEG. This is now the focus of on-going research.
No comments:
Post a Comment