Temporal recalibration in response to delayed visual feedback of active versus passive actions: an fMRI study.

The brain can adapt its expectations about the relative timing of actions and their sensory outcomes in a process known as temporal recalibration. This might occur as the recalibration of timing between the sensory (e.g. visual) outcome and (1) the motor act (sensorimotor) or (2) tactile/proprioceptive information (inter-sensory). This fMRI recalibration study investigated sensorimotor contributions to temporal recalibration by comparing active and passive conditions. Subjects were repeatedly exposed to delayed (150 ms) or undelayed visual stimuli, triggered by active or passive button presses. Recalibration effects were tested in delay detection tasks, including visual and auditory outcomes. We showed that both modalities were affected by visual recalibration. However, an active advantage was observed only in visual conditions. Recalibration was generally associated with the left cerebellum (lobules IV, V and vermis) while action related activation (active > passive) occurred in the right middle/superior frontal gyri during adaptation and test phases. Recalibration transfer from vision to audition was related to action specific activations in the cingulate cortex, the angular gyrus and left inferior frontal gyrus. Our data provide new insights in sensorimotor contributions to temporal recalibration via the middle/superior frontal gyri and inter-sensory contributions mediated by the cerebellum.

Facilitation of sensorimotor temporal recalibration mechanisms by cerebellar tDCS in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and healthy individuals.

Core symptoms in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), like hallucinations or ego-disturbances, have been associated with a failure of internal forward models to predict the sensory outcomes of self-generated actions. Importantly, forward model predictions must also be able to flexibly recalibrate to changing environmental conditions, for example to account for additional delays between action and outcome. We investigated whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to improve these sensorimotor temporal recalibration mechanisms in patients and healthy individuals. While receiving tDCS on the cerebellum, temporo-parietal junction, supplementary motor area, or sham stimulation, patients with SSD and healthy control participants were repeatedly exposed to delays between actively or passively elicited button presses and auditory outcomes. Effects of this procedure on temporal perception were assessed with a delay detection task. Similar recalibration outcomes and faciliatory effects of cerebellar tDCS on recalibration were observed in SSD and healthy individuals. Our findings indicate that sensorimotor recalibration mechanisms may be preserved in SSD and highlight the importance of the cerebellum in both patients and healthy individuals for this process. They further suggest that cerebellar tDCS could be a promising tool for addressing deficits in action-outcome monitoring and related adaptive sensorimotor processes in SSD.

Neural correlates of temporal recalibration to delayed auditory feedback of active and passive movements.

When we perform an action, its sensory outcomes usually follow shortly after. This characteristic temporal relationship aids in distinguishing self- from externally generated sensory input. To preserve this ability under dynamically changing environmental conditions, our expectation of the timing between action and outcome must be able to recalibrate, for example, when the outcome is consistently delayed. Until now, it remains unclear whether this process, known as sensorimotor temporal recalibration, can be specifically attributed to recalibration of sensorimotor (action-outcome) predictions, or whether it may be partly due to the recalibration of expectations about the intersensory (e.g., audio-tactile) timing. Therefore, we investigated the behavioral and neural correlates of temporal recalibration and differences in sensorimotor and intersensory contexts. During fMRI, subjects were exposed to delayed or undelayed tones elicited by actively or passively generated button presses. While recalibration of the expected intersensory timing (i.e., between the tactile sensation during the button movement and the tones) can be expected to occur during both active and passive movements, recalibration of sensorimotor predictions should be limited to active movement conditions. Effects of this procedure on auditory temporal perception and the modality-transfer to visual perception were tested in a delay detection task. Across both contexts, we found recalibration to be associated with activations in hippocampus and cerebellum. Context-dependent differences emerged in terms of stronger behavioral recalibration effects in sensorimotor conditions and were captured by differential activation pattern in frontal cortices, cerebellum, and sensory processing regions. These findings highlight the role of the hippocampus in encoding and retrieving newly acquired temporal stimulus associations during temporal recalibration. Furthermore, recalibration-related activations in the cerebellum may reflect the retention of multiple representations of temporal stimulus associations across both contexts. Finally, we showed that sensorimotor predictions modulate recalibration-related processes in frontal, cerebellar, and sensory regions, which potentially account for the perceptual advantage of sensorimotor versus intersensory temporal recalibration.

Improving causality perception judgments in schizophrenia spectrum disorder via transcranial direct current stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Deficient causality perception and attribution may underlie key symptoms of schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD), such as delusions and ideas of reference. Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can increase the influence of spatial information on perceptual causality judgments among healthy participants, its effect among patients with SSD remains unknown. We sought to determine whether tDCS modulates the contribution of stimulus characteristics to perceptual causality judgments among patients with SSD; we predicted that right parietal tDCS would increase the influence of spatial stimulus characteristics on patients' causality perception. METHODS: Patients with SSD received frontal, parietal, frontoparietal and sham tDCS in 4 separate sessions. Pre- and post-tDCS, patients viewed video clips of ball A colliding with ball B. Spatial linearity (ball B's angle of egress) and temporal contiguity (delay between collision and ball B's movement) varied parametrically. After each launching event, patients rated perceived causality. RESULTS: Among 19 patients with SSD, we found a brain region-dependent effect of tDCS regarding sensitivity to violations of spatial linearity. After right parietal anodal tDCS, the influence of angle variations on patients' perceptual causality judgments increased, reflected by a higher probability of perceived causality for stimuli with small angles and a lower probability of perceived causality for stimuli with high angles. CONCLUSION: Transcranial direct current stimulation increased the influence of spatial stimulus characteristics on causality perception among patients with SSD. Future research should explore potential links between tDCS-induced changes in basic perceptual processes and clinical symptoms, such as delusions and ideas of reference.

The impact of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on sensorimotor and inter-sensory temporal recalibration.

The characteristic temporal relationship between actions and their sensory outcomes allows us to distinguish self- from externally generated sensory events. However, the complex sensory environment can cause transient delays between action and outcome calling for flexible recalibration of predicted sensorimotor timing. Since the neural underpinnings of this process are largely unknown this study investigated the involvement of the cerebellum by means of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS). While receiving anodal, cathodal, dual-hemisphere or sham ctDCS, in an adaptation phase, participants were exposed to constant delays of 150 ms between actively or passively generated button presses and visual sensory outcomes. Recalibration in the same (visual outcome) and in another sensory modality (auditory outcome) was assessed in a subsequent test phase during which variable delays between button press and visual or auditory outcome had to be detected. Results indicated that temporal recalibration occurred in audition after anodal ctDCS while it was absent in vision. As the adaptation modality was visual, effects in audition suggest that recalibration occurred on a supra-modal level. In active conditions, anodal ctDCS improved sensorimotor recalibration at the delay level closest to the adaptation delay, suggesting a precise cerebellar-dependent temporal recalibration mechanism. In passive conditions, the facilitation of inter-sensory recalibration by anodal ctDCS was overall stronger and tuned to larger delays. These findings point to a role of the cerebellum in supra-modal temporal recalibration across sensorimotor and perceptual domains, but the differential manifestation of the effect across delay levels in active and passive conditions points to differences in the underlying mechanisms depending on the availability of action-based predictions. Furthermore, these results suggest that anodal ctDCS can be a promising tool for facilitating effects of temporal recalibration in sensorimotor and inter-sensory contexts.

Commonalities and differences in predictive neural processing of discrete vs continuous action feedback.

Sensory action consequences are highly predictable and thus engage less neural resources compared to externally generated sensory events. While this has frequently been observed to lead to attenuated perceptual sensitivity and suppression of activity in sensory cortices, some studies conversely reported enhanced perceptual sensitivity for action consequences. These divergent findings might be explained by the type of action feedback, i.e., discrete outcomes vs. continuous feedback. Therefore, in the present study we investigated the impact of discrete and continuous action feedback on perceptual and neural processing during action feedback monitoring. During fMRI data acquisition, participants detected temporal delays (0-417 ms) between actively or passively generated wrist movements and visual feedback that was either continuously provided during the movement or that appeared as a discrete outcome. Both feedback types resulted in (1) a neural suppression effect (active