Dataset Information

Beta oscillations following performance feedback predict subsequent recall of task-relevant information.

ABSTRACT: Reward delivery in reinforcement learning tasks elicits increased beta power in the human EEG over frontal areas of the scalp but it is unclear whether these 20-30 Hz oscillations directly facilitate reward learning. We previously proposed that frontal beta is not specific to reward processing but rather reflects the role of prefrontal cortex in maintaining and transferring task-related information to other brain areas. To test this proposal, we had subjects perform a reinforcement learning task followed by a memory recall task in which subjects were asked to recall stimuli associated either with reward feedback (Reward Recall condition) or error feedback (Error Recall condition). We trained a classifier on post-feedback beta power in the Reward Recall condition to discriminate trials associated with reward feedback from those associated with error feedback and then tested the classifier on post-feedback beta power in the Error Recall condition. Crucially, the model classified error-related beta in the Error Recall condition as reward-related. The model also predicted stimulus recall from post-feedback beta power irrespective of feedback valence and task condition. These results indicate that post-feedback beta power is not specific to reward processing but rather reflects a more general task-related process.

SUBMITTER: HajiHosseini A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7493892 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Beta oscillations following performance feedback predict subsequent recall of task-relevant information.

HajiHosseini Azadeh A Hutcherson Cendri A CA Holroyd Clay B CB

Scientific reports 20200915 1

Reward delivery in reinforcement learning tasks elicits increased beta power in the human EEG over frontal areas of the scalp but it is unclear whether these 20-30 Hz oscillations directly facilitate reward learning. We previously proposed that frontal beta is not specific to reward processing but rather reflects the role of prefrontal cortex in maintaining and transferring task-related information to other brain areas. To test this proposal, we had subjects perform a reinforcement learning task ...[more]

PMID: 32934274

Similar Datasets

Project description:Perception of time is susceptible to distortions; among other factors, it has been suggested that the perceived duration of a stimulus is affected by the observer's expectations. It has been hypothesized that the duration of an oddball stimulus is overestimated because it is unexpected, whereas repeated stimuli have a shorter perceived duration because they are expected. However, recent findings suggest instead that fulfilled expectations about a stimulus elicit an increase in perceived duration, and that the oddball effect occurs because the oddball is a target stimulus, not because it is unexpected. Therefore, it has been suggested that top-down attention is sometimes sufficient to explain this effect, and sometimes only necessary, with an additional contribution from saliency. However, how the expectedness of a target stimulus and its salient features affect its perceived duration is still an open question. In the present study, participants' expectations about and the saliency of target stimuli were orthogonally manipulated with stimuli presented on a short (Experiment 1) or long (Experiment 2) temporal scale. Four repetitive standard stimuli preceded each target stimulus in a task in which participants judged whether the target was longer or shorter in duration than the standards. Engagement of top-down attention to target stimuli increased their perceived duration to the same extent irrespective of their expectedness. A small but significant additional contribution to this effect from the saliency of target stimuli was dependent on the temporal scale of stimulus presentation. In Experiment 1, saliency only significantly increased perceived duration in the case of expected target stimuli. In contrast, in Experiment 2, saliency exerted a significant effect on the overestimation elicited by unexpected target stimuli, but the contribution of this variable was eliminated in the case of expected target stimuli. These findings point to top-down attention as the primary cognitive mechanism underlying the perceptual extraction and processing of task-relevant information, which may be strongly correlated with perceived duration. Furthermore, the scalar properties of timing were observed, favoring the pacemaker-accumulator model of timing as the underlying timing mechanism.

Project description:The influence of feedback on performance is a topic of ongoing debate, with some previous studies finding it to be ineffective, while others have discovered that it can be helpful or harmful. One possible reason for these inconsistent results may be that feedback can create a conflict between a person's beliefs and the sensory information they receive. In the present study, we used a Vernier discrimination task to examine the influence of biased feedback on performance, as this type of feedback is most likely to create conflict. Biased feedback refers to feedback that does not align with the subjects' choices. The Vernier discrimination task is a type of psychophysical task that is often used to measure an individual's ability to perceive differences in the position or orientation of two visual stimuli. The task involves presenting two stimuli, one of which is slightly offset from the other, and asking the individual to determine the direction and magnitude of the offset. In Experiment 1, feedback was provided after each trial using large-offset verniers as guidance. The large-offset verniers always received correct feedback, but the small and medium-offset verniers might receive biased feedback. In Experiment 2, feedback was provided after each block of eight verniers. In Experiment 3, we removed the large offset vernier to investigate the influence of block feedback on the signal and noise. The results showed that the accuracy for the target vernier decreased due to biased feedback in both the trial feedback (Experiment 1) and the block feedback (Experiment 2). However, in Experiments 1 and 2, performance improved when feedback was absent. Moreover, if the difference between the two types of stimuli is great, the individual will engage in encoding learning rather than decision learning (Experiments 1 and 2). If the discrimination between the two types of stimuli is low, an individual's ability to discriminate noise is more vulnerable to the influence of biased feedback than the ability to discriminate the signal (Experiment 3). These results are discussed in relation to the mechanism of biased feedback, the process of encoding learning, the monitoring of internal feedback, and the generalization of false decisions.

Dataset Information

Beta oscillations following performance feedback predict subsequent recall of task-relevant information.

Publications

Beta oscillations following performance feedback predict subsequent recall of task-relevant information.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets