Dynamically filtering the brain

Researchers believe that the prefrontal cortex acts as a dynamic filter for the brain. Dynamic filtering is selecting needed information for a current task from all the information streaming through the frontal cortex. This is why the prefrontal cortex acts as a dynamic filter, it must sort through the information and pick only that which is currently relevant.Filters

Thompson-Schill et al. (1997) wanted to study the dynamic filtering hypothesis so they had subjects generate verbs associated with presented nouns. In other words, if the person saw a “cat” they might say “meow” or “nap” or something else. Thompson-Schill et al. assigned subjects to a high or low noun-verb selection condition. In the high condition, subjects were shown nouns with many associated verbs (e.g., a ball is shown and subject could produce “bounce,” “hit,” “kick,” or “throw”) whereas in the low condition subjects are shown a noun with only one (in most cases) related verb (e.g., a chair is shown and subject says “sit”).

They conducted this experiment to see if the inferior frontal cortex is associated with just semantic memory (basically long-term-memory-type information) or if it an area that supports working memory processes (retrieving information from semantic memory and working with it—in this case filtering through it for relevant associations). The experimenters found that the inferior frontal cortex (IFC) was more activated in the high-selection conditions than in the low-selection condition. If it had not been more activated then it would merely have been a semantic, long term, memory-related area. Because of the higher activation it was concluded that the IFC was associated with working memory, specifically pulling relevant information from semantic memory. It acts as a filtering mechanism, a dynamic filter.

To confirm this finding Thompson-Schill et al. (1998) conducted another study with brain-damaged patients. They selected subjects with lesions of the IFC. They found that in the high-selection condition these patients failed to produce any verbs 15% of the time. But in the low-selection condition these lesioned subjects performed the same as control subjects. The researchers concluded that because those with IFC lesions could not generate verbs to go along with displayed nouns when there were possibly many to choose between, the lesion caused a deficit in selection. It was not a semantic deficit, but a working memory one. They could not decide what verb to use and so they said nothing. This provided neuropsychological evidence for the IFC acting as a dynamic filter for the frontal cortex, at least as far as semantic information is concerned.

Thompson-Schill et al. (1999) also conducted another study where they looked at the temporal lobe in addition to the IFC. They replicated their previous experiment with one key difference. They had the subjects complete two generative trials (one of naming an action verb like in previous experiments and the other was naming an associated color) with the same list of nouns shown the second time for the subjects. Some repeated the first association task and others did the color one the second time. They found that IFC activation increased when the association task changed but temporal lobe activation decreased the second trial for both association conditions. Gazzaniga, Ivry, and Mangun (2002) sum it up best, “The fact that the decrease was observed is consistent with the idea that semantic attributes, be they relevant or irrelevant to the task at hand, were automatically activated upon presentation of the nouns” (p. 522). This is further evidence that the IFC acts as a dynamic filter for the frontal lobes.

[Note: Contact me if you would like the references cited in my post].

Motor learning – It’s good being in the background

This was a story I first saw on Digg today but it’s worth posting about here. Researchers at MIT recently published a study in Neuron (May 24, 2007 issue) that demonstrates a completely new way of looking at motor learning. From their article:

“In experiments on motor learning, it is often assumed that there is an underlying neural representation that is stable and that adaptation takes place on top of this stable background. Our experimental and theoretical results suggest a radically different picture. The experiments show that tuning curves of motor cortical cells are constantly changing even when performing a familiar task. Furthermore, when learning a new task, learning-related changes occur on top of this background of changing tuning curves” (Rokni, Richardson, Bizzi, & Seung, 2007, p. 661).learning_theory.jpg

They are proposing that the neuronal activity associated with motor learning is a little like a sail-less ship on the ocean. This ship not only goes up and down the waves as they come, it also drifts about somewhat randomly in response to the underlying and unstable movement of the water underneath. This analogy isn’t perfect but it is OK.

Learning is not only a component of the active responsive brain activity but also the somewhat random low-level “background noise” that is slowly “retuned” and “retunes” in response to motor learning. This background noise only affects the synapses very slowly but it has a noticeable effect: “According to our theory, this slowness is necessary to prevent the noise from erasing motor memories” (p. 663). They do believe that this unstable foundation for learning is linked to forgetting over time. The researchers also state that there may be many ways that neurons can represent essentially the same behavior: “any single behavior can be realized by multiple configurations of synaptic strengths” (p. 653).

Anyway, the article was an interesting read and well worth the time if you have any interest in cognitive psychology. [The posted image is directly from the article in Neuron and is ©2007 Elsevier Inc].

Reference

Rokni, U., Richardson, A. G., Bizzi, E., & Seung, H. S. (2007). Motor learning with unstable
neural representations. Neuron, 54, 653-666.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a common cause of mortality and morbidity, affecting an estimated 150,000 people per year in the United States (Rubenfeld, Doyle, & Matthay, 1995) however, recent evidence suggests the incidence may be higher (Rubenfeld, 2003). Compared to 20 years ago mortality has decreased from 80% to 30% of ARDS participants (Milberg, Davis, Steinberg, & Hudson, 1995; Brower et al., 2000) resulting in approximately 100,000 people who survive ARDS each year in the United States (Bersten, Edibam, Hunt, & Moran, 2002). Acute respiratory distress syndrome occurs in response to a variety of insults including sepsis, trauma, pneumonia, massive transfusion and other medical/surgical conditions. Treatment of ARDS requires aggressive supportive care including positive pressure ventilation (Brower et al., 2000) and increased oxygen concentrations with risks of barotrauma, oxygen toxicity, and nosocomial infection.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome may be a consequence of multiple organ system dysfunction, including the central nervous system (Bell, Coalson, Smith, & Johanson, 1983; Montgomery, Stager, Carrico, & Hudson, 1985). Participants who survive ARDS are at risk for neuropsychological deficits (Hopkins et al., 1999; Rothenhausler, Ehrentraut, Schelling, & Kapfhammer, 2001; Al-Saidi et al., 2003; Hopkins, Weaver, Chan, & Orme, 2004) 6 to 12 months following hospital discharge. Approximately 33% of general medical ICU survivors, some with ARDS, have cognitive impairments (Jackson et al., 2003) 6 months after hospital discharge. In 1999, Hopkins and colleagues found that 45% of ARDS survivors had neurocognitive impairments including impaired memory, attention, concentration, mental processing speed, and global intellectual decline one year post-discharge.

Others have since made similar observations (Marquis et al. 2000; Rothenhausler et al., 2001; Al-Saidi et al., 2003; Jackson et al., 2003). The prevalence of neurocognitive impairments varies from 25% (Rothenhausler et al., 2001) to 78% in participants with more severe ARDS (Hopkins et al., 1999). Neurocognitive impairments are a major determinant in return to work, work productivity, and life satisfaction following ARDS (Rothenhausler et al., 2001).

 References

Al-Saidi, F., McAndrews, M. P., Cheunt, A. M., Tansey, C. M., Matte-Martyn, A., Diaz-Granados, N., et al. (2003). Neuropsychological sequelae in ARDS survivors. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 167, A737.

Bell, R. C., Coalson, J. J., Smith, J. D., & Johanson, W. G., Jr. (1983). Multiple organ system failure and infection in adult respiratory distress syndrome. Annals of Internal Medicine, 99, 293–298.

Bersten, A. D., Edibam, C., Hunt, T., & Moran, J. (2002). Incidence and mortality of acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome in three Australian States. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 165, 443–448.

Brower, R. G., Matthay, M. A., Morris, A., Schoenfeld, D., Thompson, B. T., & Wheeler, A. (2000). Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 342, 1301–1308.

Hopkins, R. O., Weaver, L. K., Chan, K. J., & Orme, J. F. (2004). Quality of life, emotional, and cognitive function following acute respiratory distress syndrome. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10, 1005–1017.

Hopkins, R. O., Weaver, L. K., Pope, D., Orme, J. F., Bigler, E. D., & Larson-Lohr, V. (1999). Neuropsychological sequelae and impaired health status in survivors of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 160, 50–56.

Jackson, J. C., Hart, R. P., Gordon, S. M., Shintani, A., Truman, B., May, L., et al. (2003). Six-month neuropsychological outcome of medical intensive care unit participants. Critical Care Medicine, 31, 1226–1234.

Marquis, K., Curtis, J., Caldwell, E., Davidson, T., Davis, J., Sanchez, P., et al. (2000). Neuropsychological sequelae in survivors of ARDS compared with critically ill control participants. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 161, A383.

Milberg, J. A., Davis, D. R., Steinberg, K. P., & Hudson, L. D. (1995). Improved survival of participants with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): 1983-1993. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 306–309.

Montgomery, A. B., Stager, M. A., Carrico, C. J., & Hudson, L. D. (1985). Causes of mortality in participants with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. American Review of Respiratory Disease, 132, 485–489.

Rothenhausler, H. B., Ehrentraut, S., Stoll, C., Schelling, G., & Kapfhammer, H. P. (2001). The relationship between cognitive performance and employment and health status in long-term survivors of the acute respiratory distress syndrome: Results of an exploratory study. General Hospital Psychiatry, 23, 90–96.

Rubenfeld, G. D. (2003). Epidemiology of acute lung injury. Critical Care Medicine, 31, S276–S284.

Rubenfeld, G. D., Doyle, R. L., & Matthay, M. A. (1995). Evaluation of definitions of ARDS. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 151, 1270–1271.

Recent alcohol research

drinking_woman.jpg

There was an interesting recent news story from Reuters. Researchers at the University of Missouri-Columbia found that, “Young adults who binge drink frequently are more likely to show disadvantageous decision-making patterns than their peers who don’t drink as heavily” (from the news article). You can’t assume that just because drinking and poor decision making are correlated that the drinking causes the poor decisions (because people who are poorer at decision making in general may drink more) but as I like to say, “Correlation does not imply causation but neither does does it deny causation.”

On the other hand, there is some evidence that drinking alcohol might slow down the progression and/or onset of dementia (e.g., Alzheimer’s Disease): Alcohol and dementia article. Again, the study is correlational so firm causations should not be inferred.

These two articles demonstrate that there is still a lot of  uncertainty about the long-term effects of alcohol consumption.

The interplay of nature and nurture

I’ve posted some PDF slides that briefly cover the topic of the interaction between nature (biology/genes) and nurture (environment). Researchers used to fight over whether human behavior was attributable to nature or nurture. Now we just accept that it is a mixture of both, but researchers still discuss whether nature or nurture is more influential on a particular behavior.

Nature and nurture slides

Overview of brain structure and function

I’ve posted links to slide providing a basic overview of brain anatomy and function. There are a number of copyrighted images in the slides so please do not use for non-personal information without permission. The information is in slide format so if anything is unclear please contact me for more information. Each PDF is about 1 MB so it could take a while to download with a slow connection.

Slides, part 1

Slides, part 2

A brief history of psychology

Modern experimental psychology started in the 1800s with the research of Wilhelm Wundt. Psychology in the United States is generally traced back to the work of William James. There have been many different theoretical approaches to psychology since then. Probably the most famous psychologist is Sigmund Freud, whose work spawned the psychodynamic theories of human behavior. Somewhat in reaction to Freud’s work are the behavioral approaches to behavior (with Ivan Pavlov, John Watson, B. F. Skinner, and Edward Thorndike as some of the major theorists behind behaviorism). The cognitive theories came next. All in all, there are many different theoretical approaches to the psychology of behavior and most psychologists today are influenced by each approach. For a slightly more in-depth outline of the history of psychology, please view the pdf slides below.

History of Psychology Slides

Note: I’ve included links to Wikipedia for all of the above researchers because I believe the information on Wikipedia is mostly accurate and fair. The site also allows the information to be easily modified if any of it is inaccurate.