(example) class presentation: john desmond
DESCRIPTION
Introduction We are constantly bombarded by sensations from multiple sources It is adaptive to be able to disregard sensations arising from our own movementsTRANSCRIPT
(Example) Class Presentation: John Desmond
Blakemore, S. J., Wolpert, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (1998).
Central cancellation of self-produced tickle sensation. Nat
Neurosci, 1(7), Introduction We are constantly bombarded by
sensations from multiple sources It is adaptive to be able to
disregard sensations arising from our own movements Introduction
This ability to predict consequences of our actions may result in
differential perception of identical sensory inputs For example, it
is very difficult to tickle oneself Previous Investigations
Introducing delay (200 ms) between movement of left hand and
receiving tactile stimulation of right hand increased tickle rating
Thus, attenuation of self-produced tactile stimulation may be due
to a temporally precise cancellation based on sensory predictions
Possible Mechanism: Forward Model
Forward models receive an efference copy of motor commands and
generate a corollary discharge that predicts the consequences of
movements Comparing this prediction with actual sensory feedback
could provide the basis for distinguishing self-generated vs.
external sensory signals Forward Model Likely Site of Forward
Model: Cerebellum Purpose of Present Experiment
Compare functional brain activation for self-produced versus
externally produced tickle sensation Hypothesis: Cerebellar
activation will distinguish these two types of stimulation Methods
6 right handed healthy subjects Mean age 33 years
fMRI scanning during 4 conditions of a 2x2 factorial design Methods
Methods Each condition lasted 32.8 sec
Each subject was scanned for all 4 conditions Each condition was
replicated 12 times Condition order was counterbalanced Subjects
instructed to keep eyes closed fMRI Methods: Data Acquisition
2 Tesla Siemens Scanner 48 axial images per volume Inplane
resolution: 3 mm x 3 mm One volume collected every 4.1 s Thus, one
block (32.8 s) = 8 volumes fMRI Methods: Data Analysis
SPM97 Volumes were motion corrected Normalized into Talairach space
Spatial Smoothing with 6 mm FWHM Statistical analysis using general
linear model Weighted contrasts performed to create statistical t
maps overlaid onto anatomical scan Results: Main Effects of
Self-generated Movement
(A+B) (C+D) Results: Main Effects of Tactile Stimulation
(A+C) (B+D) Results: Interaction of Tactile Stimulation with
Self-generated Movement
(C-D) (A-B) Results: Parietal Operculum
Interaction (C-D) (A-B) A-B not different from 0: ie., any movement
attenuates activation Results: Cingulate Interaction (C-D) (A-B)
A-B not different
from 0: ie., any movement attenuates activation Results: Cerebellum
Interaction (C-D) (A-B) A-B is different from 0 Discussion
Differential sensory responses to a self-generated movement do not
occur at the level of somatosensory cortex. Results suggest that
specific sensory predictions occur at the level of the anterior
cerebellar cortex. Conclusion We conclude that decrease of activity
in somatosensory cortex to self-produced tactile stimuli occurs
because such stimuli match the predicted sensory feedback of the
movement and that this prediction occurs in the cerebellum.
Conclusion Self-generated tickle External tickle ++