Self-regulation learning as active inference: dynamic causal modeling of an fMRI neurofeedback task.
Active Inference
brain-computer interface
fMRI
neurofeedback
self-regulation learning
Journal
Frontiers in neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-4548
Titre abrégé: Front Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101478481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
26
04
2023
accepted:
12
07
2023
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
31
8
2023
entrez:
31
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Learning to self-regulate brain activity by neurofeedback has been shown to lead to changes in the brain and behavior, with beneficial clinical and non-clinical outcomes. Neurofeedback uses a brain-computer interface to guide participants to change some feature of their brain activity. However, the neural mechanism of self-regulation learning remains unclear, with only 50% of the participants succeeding in achieving it. To bridge this knowledge gap, our study delves into the neural mechanisms of self-regulation learning via neurofeedback and investigates the brain processes associated with successful brain self-regulation. We study the neural underpinnings of self-regulation learning by employing dynamical causal modeling (DCM) in conjunction with real-time functional MRI data. The study involved a cohort of 18 participants undergoing neurofeedback training targeting the supplementary motor area. A critical focus was the comparison between top-down hierarchical connectivity models proposed by Active Inference and alternative bottom-up connectivity models like reinforcement learning. Our analysis revealed a crucial distinction in brain connectivity patterns between successful and non-successful learners. Particularly, successful learners evinced a significantly stronger top-down effective connectivity towards the target area implicated in self-regulation. This heightened top-down network engagement closely resembles the patterns observed in goal-oriented and cognitive control studies, shedding light on the intricate cognitive processes intertwined with self-regulation learning. The findings from our investigation underscore the significance of cognitive mechanisms in the process of self-regulation learning through neurofeedback. The observed stronger top-down effective connectivity in successful learners indicates the involvement of hierarchical cognitive control, which aligns with the tenets of Active Inference. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the neural dynamics behind successful self-regulation learning and provides insights into the potential cognitive architecture underpinning this process.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37650101
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1212549
pmc: PMC10465165
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1212549Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Vargas, Araya, Sepulveda, Rodriguez-Fernandez, Friston, Sitaram and El-Deredy.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Neuroimage. 2019 Oct 1;199:730-744
pubmed: 28219774
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014 Jul;44:124-41
pubmed: 24125857
Hum Brain Mapp. 2020 Oct 1;41(14):3839-3854
pubmed: 32729652
PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Jan;10(1):e1003422
pubmed: 24465195
Neuroimage. 2019 Oct 15;200:174-190
pubmed: 31226497
Neuroimage. 2003 Aug;19(4):1273-302
pubmed: 12948688
Neuroimage. 2009 Jul 15;46(4):1004-17
pubmed: 19306932
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Dec 31;19(1):
pubmed: 35010678
Front Comput Neurosci. 2020 May 19;14:41
pubmed: 32508611
Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Feb 25;14:60
pubmed: 32161529
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017 Feb;18(2):86-100
pubmed: 28003656
Netw Neurosci. 2017;1(4):381-414
pubmed: 29417960
Nat Commun. 2020 Aug 31;11(1):4429
pubmed: 32868772
Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Apr;22(4):294-306
pubmed: 29475638
PLoS Comput Biol. 2010 Mar 12;6(3):e1000709
pubmed: 20300649
Nat Methods. 2020 Mar;17(3):261-272
pubmed: 32015543
Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jan;2(1):79-87
pubmed: 10195184
Hum Brain Mapp. 2016 Sep;37(9):3153-71
pubmed: 27272616
PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Jul 28;13(7):e1005681
pubmed: 28753639
Brain Behav. 2019 Mar;9(3):e01240
pubmed: 30790474
Front Syst Neurosci. 2015 Nov 27;9:164
pubmed: 26640432
Front Artif Intell. 2020 Sep 03;3:69
pubmed: 33733186
Neuroimage. 2019 Mar;188:539-556
pubmed: 30572110
Trends Cogn Sci. 2017 Dec;21(12):997-1010
pubmed: 29031663
Neuroimage. 2016 Jan 1;124(Pt A):806-812
pubmed: 26419389
Neuroimage. 2020 Feb 1;206:116189
pubmed: 31521825
Curr Biol. 2016 Jul 25;26(14):1861-6
pubmed: 27374335
Neuroscience. 2018 May 15;378:155-164
pubmed: 28069531
Neuroimage. 2016 Mar;128:413-431
pubmed: 26569570
Psychol Rev. 2013 Jan;120(1):190-229
pubmed: 23356780
Neuroimage. 2007 Jan 1;34(1):220-34
pubmed: 17055746
Nat Neurosci. 2015 May;18(5):744-51
pubmed: 25849989
Nature. 2015 Feb 26;518(7540):529-33
pubmed: 25719670
Neuroimage. 2018 May 15;172:786-807
pubmed: 29288868
J Neurosci. 2019 Aug 7;39(32):6265-6275
pubmed: 31182633
Neuroimage. 2011 Sep 15;58(2):312-22
pubmed: 19961941
Cereb Cortex. 2017 Oct 1;27(10):4960-4970
pubmed: 28922830
Prog Neurobiol. 2015 Nov;134:17-35
pubmed: 26365173
Trends Cogn Sci. 2022 Apr;26(4):290-299
pubmed: 35210175
Neuroimage. 2020 Jul 15;215:116834
pubmed: 32283275
J Math Psychol. 2020 Dec;99:102447
pubmed: 33343039
Front Neurosci. 2019 Jul 10;13:668
pubmed: 31354405