1. When the brain is prepared to learn: Enhancing human learning using real- time fMRI Y, J. J. a, Hinds, O. b, Ofen, N. a, Thompson, T. W. b, Whitfield-Gabrieli, S, a, Triantafyllou, C. b,c & Gabrieli, J. D. E a,b., 2011. NeuroImage, 59, 846-852. 心理 101 楊期蘭

2. a: McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA b: Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA c: Department of Radiology, MGH, Athinoula A. Martinos Center, Harvard Medical School, USA

3. NeuroImage ◦ often about functional neuroimaging and functional human brain mapping. ◦ Impact factor: 5.932 Real-time fMRI: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/christo pher_decharms_scans_the_brain_in_real_ time.html http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/christo pher_decharms_scans_the_brain_in_real_ time.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywTlA 9k5UbU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywTlA 9k5UbU

4. Outline Introduction Experiment1: ◦ Method ◦ Results Experiment 2: ◦ Method ◦ Results Discussion Summary Questions

5. Introduction medial temporal lobe (MTL) system ◦ declarative or explicit memory for events and facts ◦ (Cohen and Squire, 1980; Corkin, 2002; Graf and Schacter, 1985; Scoville and Milner, 1957; Squire, 1992) parahippocampal cortex (PHC) ◦ successful memory formation for scenes & words ◦ (Wagner et al., 1998) parahippocampal place area (PPA) ◦ Responds maximally to scenes ◦ (Epstein and Kanwisher, 1998)

6. parahippocampal cortex (PHC)

7. parahippocampal place area

8. Introduction brain state occurring prior to stimulus presentation influences memory formation for that stimulus Pre-stimulus evoked response potentials (ERPs) => memory for words (Otten et al., 2006) pre-stimulus PPA activation => successful memory for scenes (Turk- Browne et al., 2006) stimuli

9. hippocampal theta activity => predicts behavioral learning rate (Berry et al., 1978; Berry and Swain, 1989; Seager et al., 2002) => enhance learning in eyeblink conditioning in rabbits (Asaka et al., 2005; Griffin et al., 2004; Seager et al., 2002) Introduction

10. Experiment 1: ◦ whether such brain states that were good or bad for learning scenes could be identified in the PPA Experiment 2: ◦ PPA ◦ detected by real-time fMRI ◦ scenes triggered by good brain states would be better remembered than scenes triggered by bad brain states

11. Experiment 1 Goal: ◦ identification of a brain state of preparedness to learn ◦ Find PPA region Participants: ◦ 9 M, 11 F, right-handed

12. Task materials and procedure viewed 250 color photographs of indoor and outdoor scenes Fixation cross For each trial, remember or forget the presented scene 3 s 9 s Pressing one of two buttons 5 sessions

13. In fMRI

14. +

15. remember or forget the presented scene

17. +

19. scanned study phase Recognition memory test outside of the scanner 500 randomly presented scenes: 250 old (studied) & 250 new(unstudied foils) 4 button confidence scale ranging from old to new

20. Statistical analyses SPM5 software package remembered (‘hit’), know (‘weak hit’), forgotten (‘strong’ and ‘weak misses’ combined)

23. Results Pre-stimulus activation in left PPA was significantly lower for remembered scenes than forgotten scenes

24. Study 250 Test: 250 old, 250 new Hit Miss False alarm Correct rejection

26. Discussion The finding is similar but opposite in direction from a previous study that reported a positive correlation between pre-stimulus PPA activation and subsequent memory for scenes. (Turk-Browne et al., 2006) ◦ differences in inter-stimulus intervals ◦ hemodynamic response functions (HRFs) ◦ high-pass filter value

27. Experiment 2 Goal: ◦ controlling human learning via real-time monitoring of brain state Participants: ◦ 9M, 7F, right-handed

28. Task materials and procedure ROI definitions: ◦ functional PPA localizer ◦ viewed a series of color images of indoor and outdoor scenes, objects, and faces in a block- design ◦ When repeated => press the button …… ScenesObjectsFaces

29. Measuring brain states and triggering stimulus presentation using rtfMRI ◦ passively viewed a fixation cross during scans ◦ computing BOLD signal fluctuation within the PPA and reference ROIs ◦ a “good” brain state: PPA activation being less than the reference ROI activation by a participant- specific threshold ◦ a “bad” brain state: PPA activation being greater than the reference ROI by the same threshold

32. scanned study phase a recognition memory test if the test scene was ‘old’ or ‘new’ => if “old” => confidence rating (2- button scale)

33. Statistical analyses Recognition accuracy ◦ Old: correct identification of old scenes (% hits) - incorrect identification of new scenes (% false alarms)

34. Results more accurate for remembering scenes triggered by good brain states than by bad brain states

38. Discussion Experiment 1: ◦ identified a brain state in the PHG, specifically the PPA => associated with better or worse memory formation Experiment 2: ◦ used real-time fMRI to present information to-be-learned in either a good or bad brain state for learning

39. brain measures may offer a unique window onto human preparedness to learn Decreased pre-stimulus activation in the PPA predicted successful memory formation Contrast with the general finding: ◦ greater stimulus-evoked activation is associated with successful memory formation for scenes. (e.g., Brewer et al., 1998; Gabrieli et al., 1997; Stern et al., 1996)

40. The finding is convincing: ◦ Lower left PPA activation predicted superior learning in Exp. 1,2. ◦ it was causal for superior memory formation in Exp. 2. Lower activation => a lack of processing activity in the PPA => more resources are available for memory encoding.

41. Limitation: ◦ no neutral baseline.  whether the increased learning or decreased learning that occurred in good or bad brain states  Reflect only gains, only losses, or both relative to baseline

42. whether preparedness to learn can be measured in other brain regions in the future: ◦ greater pre-stimulus activation in motor cortex (SMA) & lesser brain activation in default brain regions => faster performance (RT) (Hinds et al., submitted for publication)

43. fMRI provides a kind of causal relation between brain activation and human behavior. ◦ the fMRI signal was the cause of behavior (good or bad learning) ◦ (correlation V.S. causation) be useful for education and training

44. Summary

45. Question

46. Reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeuroImage http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=core_concepts _glossary&print=on http://www.sfn.org/index.aspx?pagename=core_concepts _glossary&print=on http://neurocuisine.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/wine- spillover-effect/ http://neurocuisine.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/wine- spillover-effect/ http://www.sciencemag.org/content/293/5539/2425.full http://www.archpage.com.tw/Product/ViewDetail.asp?ID =63988&ID2=12514 http://www.archpage.com.tw/Product/ViewDetail.asp?ID =63988&ID2=12514 http://www.nipic.com/show/2/88/43dffeeb5e656fd5.html http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.com/2011/01/sleep -architecture.html http://evolutionarypsychiatry.blogspot.com/2011/01/sleep -architecture.html