Agency and responsibility over virtual movements controlled through different paradigms of brain-computer interface.
BCI
agency
body ownership
brain-machine interfaces
embodiment
motor action
motor activity
motor imagery
mu rhythm
sense of agency
virtual reality
visual evoked potentials
Journal
The Journal of physiology
ISSN: 1469-7793
Titre abrégé: J Physiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0266262
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
received:
21
04
2019
accepted:
16
10
2019
pubmed:
28
10
2019
medline:
20
5
2021
entrez:
25
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Embodiment of a virtual body was induced and its movements were controlled by two different brain-computer interface (BCI) paradigms - one based on signals from sensorimotor versus one from visual cortical areas. BCI-control of movements engenders agency, but not equally for all paradigms. Cortical sensorimotor activation correlates with agency and responsibility. This has significant implications for neurological rehabilitation and neuroethics. Agency is the attribution of an action to the self and is a prerequisite for experiencing responsibility over its consequences. Here we investigated agency and responsibility by studying the control of movements of an embodied avatar, via brain-computer interface (BCI) technology, in immersive virtual reality. After induction of virtual body ownership by visuomotor correlations, healthy participants performed a motor task with their virtual body. We compared the passive observation of the subject's 'own' virtual arm performing the task with (1) the control of the movement through activation of sensorimotor areas (motor imagery) and (2) the control of the movement through activation of visual areas (steady-state visually evoked potentials). The latter two conditions were carried out using a BCI and both shared the intention and the resulting action. We found that BCI-control of movements engenders the sense of agency, which is strongest for sensorimotor area activation. Furthermore, increased activity of sensorimotor areas, as measured using EEG, correlates with levels of agency and responsibility. We discuss the implications of these results for the neural basis of agency.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2419-2434Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology © 2019 The Physiological Society.
Références
Baillet S, Mosher JC & Leahy RM (2001). Electromagnetic brain mapping. IEEE Signal Process Mag 18, 14-30.
Banakou D & Slater M (2014). Body ownership causes illusory self-attribution of speaking and influences subsequent real speaking. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111, 17678-17683.
Banakou D & Slater M (2017). Embodiment in a virtual body that speaks produces agency over the speaking but does not necessarily influence subsequent real speaking. Sci Rep 7, 14227.
Bednark JG & Franz EA (2014). Agency attribution: event-related potentials and outcome monitoring. Exp Brain Res 232, 1117-1126.
Berger H (1929). Über das Elektrenkephalogramm des Menschen. Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr 87, 527-570.
Birbaumer N (2006). Breaking the silence: Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) for communication and motor control. Psychophysiology 43, 517-532.
Blakemore S-J, Wolpert D & Frith C (2000). Why can't you tickle yourself? Neuroreport 11, R11-R16.
Blankertz B, Acqualagna L, Dähne S, Haufe S, Schultze-Kraft M, Sturm I, Ušćumlic M, Wenzel MA, Curio G & Müller K-R (2016). The Berlin brain-computer interface: Progress beyond communication and control. Front Neurosci 10, 530.
Blankertz B, Dornhege G, Krauledat M, Müller K-R & Curio G (2005). The Berlin brain-computer interface: Report from the feedback sessions. FIRST Reports. Fraunhofer Institute, Munich.
Blankertz B, Tomioka R, Lemm S, Kawanabe M & Muller K-R (2008). Optimizing spatial filters for robust EEG single-trial analysis. IEEE Signal Process Mag 25, 41-56.
Buccino G (2014). Action observation treatment: a novel tool in neurorehabilitation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 369, 20130185.
Buccino G, Solodkin A & Small SL (2006). Functions of the mirror neuron system: implications for neurorehabilitation. Cogn Behav Neurol 19, 55-63.
Buch E, Weber C, Cohen LG, Braun C, Dimyan MA, Ard T, Mellinger J, Caria A, Soekadar S, Fourkas A & Birbaumer N (2008). Think to Move: a neuromagnetic brain-computer interface (BCI) system for chronic stroke. Stroke 39, 910-917.
Cavazzana A, Penolazzi B, Begliomini C & Bisiacchi PS (2015). Neural underpinnings of the “agent brain”: New evidence from transcranial direct current stimulation. Eur J Neurosci 42, 1889-1894.
Chambon V, Sidarus N & Haggard P (2014). From action intentions to action effects: How does the sense of agency come about? Front Hum Neurosci 8, 320.
Chambon V, Wenke D, Fleming SM, Prinz W & Haggard P (2013). An online neural substrate for sense of agency. Cereb Cortex 23, 1031-1037.
Chatrian GE, Lettich E & Nelson PL (1985). Ten percent electrode system for topographic studies of spontaneous and evoked EEG activities. Am J EEG Technol 25, 83-92.
Clochon P, Fontbonne J, Lebrun N & Etevenon P (1996). A new method for quantifying EEG event-related desynchronization: amplitude envelope analysis. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 98, 126-129.
David N (2012). New frontiers in the neuroscience of the sense of agency. Front Hum Neurosci 6, 161.
Denis D, Rowe R, Williams AM & Milne E (2017). The role of cortical sensorimotor oscillations in action anticipation. Neuroimage 146, 1102-1114.
de Vignemont F & Fourneret P (2004). The sense of agency: A philosophical and empirical review of the “Who” system. Conscious Cogn 13, 1-19.
Dornhege G, Blankertz B & Curio G (2003). Speeding up classification of multi-channel brain-computer interfaces: Common spatial patterns for slow cortical potentials. First Int IEEE EMBS Conf Neural Eng 2003 Conf Proc, https://doi.org/10.1109/CNE.2003.1196898.
Ehrsson HH, Kuhtz-Buschbeck JP & Forssberg H (2002). Brain regions controlling nonsynergistic versus synergistic movement of the digits: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurosci 22, 5074-5080.
Evans N, Gale S, Schurger A & Blanke O (2015). Visual feedback dominates the sense of agency for brain-machine actions. PLoS One 10, e0130019.
Fard PR & Grosse-Wentrup M (2014). The influence of decoding accuracy on perceived control: A simulated BCI study. arXiv 1410.6752, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.6752.pdf
Fonov V, Evans AC, Botteron K, Almli CR, McKinstry RC & Collins DL (2011). Unbiased average age-appropriate atlases for pediatric studies. Neuroimage 54, 313-327.
Frith CD, Blakemore SJ & Wolpert DM (2000). Abnormalities in the awareness and control of action. Philos Trans R Soc London Ser B Biol Sci 355, 1771-1788.
Fukunaga K (1990). Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition, 2nd edn. San Diego, CA, Academic Press.
Gallagher S (2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends Cogn Sci 4, 14-21.
Gastaut HJ & Bert J (1954). EEG changes during cinematographic presentation (Moving picture activation of the EEG). Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 6, 433-444.
Gerardin E, Sirigu A, Lehéricy S, Poline J-B, Gaymard B, Marsault C, Agid Y & Le Bihan D (2000). Partially overlapping neural networks for real and imagined hand movements. Cereb Cortex 10, 1093-1104.
Giummarra MJ, Gibson SJ, Georgiou-Karistianis N & Bradshaw JL (2008). Mechanisms underlying embodiment, disembodiment and loss of embodiment. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32, 143-160.
Graimann B & Pfurtscheller G (2006). Quantification and visualization of event-related changes in oscillatory brain activity in the time-frequency domain. Prog Brain Res 159, 79-97.
Gramfort A, Papadopoulo T, Olivi E & Clerc M (2010). OpenMEEG: opensource software for quasistatic bioelectromagnetics. Biomed Eng Online 9, 45.
Guger C, Allison BZ, Großwindhager B, Prückl R, Hintermüller C, Kapeller C, Bruckner M, Krausz G & Edlinger G (2012). How many people could use an SSVEP BCI? Front Neurosci 6, 169.
Guger C, Edlinger G, Harkam W, Niedermayer I & Pfurtscheller G (2003). How many people are able to operate an EEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI)? IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11, 145-147.
Haggard P (2017). Sense of agency in the human brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 18, 196-207.
Haggard P & Tsakiris M (2009). The experience of agency: feelings, judgments, and responsibility. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 18, 242-246.
Hjorth B (1975). An on-line transformation of EEG scalp potentials into orthogonal source derivations. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 39, 526-530.
Hochberg LR, Bacher D, Jarosiewicz B, Masse NY, Simeral JD, Vogel J, Haddadin S, Liu J, Cash SS, van der Smagt P & Donoghue JP (2012). Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm. Nature 485, 372-375.
Hyvärinen A & Oja E (2000). Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. Neural Netw 13, 411-430.
Imaizumi S & Asai T (2015). Dissociation of agency and body ownership following visuomotor temporal recalibration. Front Integr Neurosci 9, 35.
Kalckert A & Ehrsson H (2012). Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: A dissociation of ownership and agency. Front Hum Neurosci 6, 40.
Kilteni K & Ehrsson HH (2017). Body ownership determines the attenuation of self-generated tactile sensations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 114, 8426-8431.
Kokkinara E, Kilteni K, Blom KJ & Slater M (2016). First person perspective of seated participants over a walking virtual body leads to illusory agency over the walking. Sci Rep 6, 28879.
Koles ZJ, Lind JC & Soong ACK (1995). Spatio-temporal decomposition of the EEG: A general approach to the isolation and localization of sources. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 95, 219-230.
Kumar D & Srinivasan N (2014). Naturalizing sense of agency with a hierarchical event-control approach. PLoS One 9, e92431.
Kybic J, Clerc M, Abboud T, Faugeras O, Keriven R & Papadopoulo T (2005). A common formalism for the integral formulations of the forward EEG problem. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24, 12-28.
Lemm S, Müller K-R & Curio G (2009). A generalized framework for auantifying the dynamics of EEG event-related desynchronization. PLoS Comput Biol 5, e1000453.
Llobera J, González-Franco M, Perez-Marcos D, Valls-Solé J, Slater M & Sanchez-Vives MV (2013). Virtual reality for assessment of patients suffering chronic pain: a case study. Exp Brain Res 225, 105-117.
Marchesotti S, Martuzzi R, Schurger A, Blefari ML, delMillán JR, Bleuler H & Blanke O (2017). Cortical and subcortical mechanisms of brain-machine interfaces. Hum Brain Mapp 38, 2971-2989.
Mauritz K-H & Wise SP (1986). Premotor cortex of the rhesus monkey: neuronal activity in anticipation of predictable environmental events. Exp Brain Res 61, 229-244.
Middendorf M, McMillan G, Calhoun G & Jones KS (2000). Brain-computer interfaces based on the steady-state visual-evoked response. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 8, 211-214.
Moore JW, Ruge D, Wenke D, Rothwell J & Haggard P (2010). Disrupting the experience of control in the human brain: pre-supplementary motor area contributes to the sense of agency. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 277, 2503-2509.
Moseley GL (2004). Graded motor imagery is effective for long-standing complex regional pain syndrome: A randomised controlled trial. Pain 108, 192-198.
Müller-Gerking J, Pfurtscheller G & Flyvbjerg H (1999). Designing optimal spatial filters for single-trial EEG classification in a movement task. Clin Neurophysiol 110, 787-798.
Nierula B, Hohlefeld FU, Curio G & Nikulin VV (2013). No somatotopy of sensorimotor alpha-oscillation responses to differential finger stimulation. Neuroimage 76, 294-303.
Nikouline VV, Linkenkaer-Hansen K, Wikström H, Kesäniemi M, Antonova EV, Ilmoniemi RJ & Huttunen J (2000). Dynamics of mu-rhythm suppression caused by median nerve stimulation: A magnetoencephalographic study in human subjects. Neurosci Lett 294, 163-166.
Nikulin VV, Hohlefeld FU, Jacobs AM & Curio G (2008). Quasi-movements: A novel motor-cognitive phenomenon. Neuropsychologia 46, 727-742.
Oldfield RC (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9, 97-113.
Padrao G, Gonzalez-Franco M, Sanchez-Vives MV, Slater M & Rodriguez-Fornells A (2016). Violating body movement semantics: Neural signatures of self-generated and external-generated errors. Neuroimage 124, 147-156.
Perez-Marcos D, Slater M & Sanchez-Vives MV (2009). Inducing a virtual hand ownership illusion through a brain-computer interface. Neuroreport 20, 589-594.
Pfurtscheller G & Aranibar A (1977). Event-related cortical desynchronization detected by power measurements of scalp EEG. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 42, 817-826.
Pfurtscheller G, Brunner C, Schlögl A & Lopes da Silva FH (2006). Mu rhythm (de)synchronization and EEG single-trial classification of different motor imagery tasks. Neuroimage 31, 153-159.
Pfurtscheller G & Lopes da Silva FH (1999). Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles. Clin Neurophysiol 110, 1842-1857.
Pfurtscheller G & Neuper C (1997). Motor imagery activates primary sensorimotor area in humans. Neurosci Lett 239, 65-68.
Pfurtscheller G & Neuper C (2001). Motor imagery and direct brain-computer communication. Proc IEEE 89, 1123-1134.
Pfurtscheller G, Scherer R, Muller-Putz GR & Lopes da Silva FH (2008). Short-lived brain state after cued motor imagery in naive subjects. Eur J Neurosci 28, 1419-1426.
Rosenblum M & Kurths J (1998). Analysing synchronization phenomena from bivariate data by means of the Hilbert transform. In Nonlinear Analysis of Physiological Data, ed. Kantz H, Kurths J & Mayer-Kress G, pp. 91-99. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Roskies AL (2010). How does neuroscience affect our conception of volition? Annu Rev Neurosci 33, 109-130.
Sanchez-Vives MV, Spanlang B, Frisoli A, Bergamasco M & Slater M (2010). Virtual hand illusion induced by visuomotor correlations. PLoS One 5, e10381.
Slater M, Perez-Marcos D, Ehrsson HH & Sanchez-Vives MV (2008). Towards a digital body: The virtual arm illusion. Front Hum Neurosci 2, 6.
Slater M, Perez-Marcos D, Ehrsson HH & Sanchez-Vives MV (2009). Inducing illusory ownership of a virtual body. Front Neurosci 3, 214-220.
Slater M, Spanlang B, Sanchez-Vives MV & Blanke O (2010). First person experience of body transfer in virtual reality. PLoS One 5, e10564.
Spanlang B, Normand J-M, Borland D, Kilteni K, Giannopoulos E, Pomes A, Gonzalez-Franco M, Pérez-Marcos D, Arroyo-Palacios J, Navarro Muncunill X & Slater M (2014). How to build an embodiment lab: achieving body representation illusions in virtual reality. Front Robot AI 1, 9.
Sperduti M, Delaveau P, Fossati P & Nadel J (2011). Different brain structures related to self- and external-agency attribution: A brief review and meta-analysis. Brain Struct Funct 216, 151-157.
Synofzik M, Vosgerau G & Newen A (2008). I move, therefore I am: A new theoretical framework to investigate agency and ownership. Conscious Cogn 17, 411-424.
Tadel F, Baillet S, Mosher JC, Pantazis D & Leahy RM (2011). Brainstorm: A user-friendly application for MEG/EEG analysis. Comput Intell Neurosci 2011, 13.
Tsakiris M, Longo MR & Haggard P (2010). Having a body versus moving your body: Neural signatures of agency and body-ownership. Neuropsychologia 48, 2740-2749.
Vialatte F-B, Maurice M, Dauwels J & Cichocki A (2010). Steady-state visually evoked potentials: Focus on essential paradigms and future perspectives. Prog Neurobiol 90, 418-438.
Wegner DM, Sparrow B & Winerman L (2004). Vicarious agency: experiencing control over the movements of others. J Pers Soc Psychol 86, 838-848.
Weiss C, Tsakiris M, Haggard P & Schütz-Bosbach S (2014). Agency in the sensorimotor system and its relation to explicit action awareness. Neuropsychologia 52, 82-92.
Wenke D, Fleming SM & Haggard P (2010). Subliminal priming of actions influences sense of control over effects of action. Cognition 115, 26-38.
Wolpert DM, Ghahramani Z & Jordan MI (1995). An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 269, 1880.