Action–effect contingency modulates the readiness potential

Abstract

The ability to constantly anticipate events in the world is critical to human survival. It has been suggested that predictive processing originates from the motor system and that incoming sensory inputs can be altered to facilitate sensorimotor integration. In the current study, we investigated the role of the readiness potentials, i.e. the premotor brain activity registered within the fronto-parietal areas, in sensorimotor integration. We recorded EEG data during three conditions: a motor condition in which a simple action was required, a visual condition in which a visual stimulus was presented on the screen, and a visuomotor condition wherein the visual stimulus appeared in response to a button press. We measured evoked potentials before the motor action and/or after the appearance of the visual stimulus. Anticipating a visual feedback in response to a voluntary action modulated the amplitude of the readiness potentials. We also found an enhancement in the amplitude of the visual N1 and a reduction in the amplitude of the visual P2 when the visual stimulus was induced by the action rather than externally generated. Our results suggest that premotor brain activity might reflect predictive processes in sensory-motor binding and that the readiness potentials may possibly represent a neural marker of these predictive mechanisms.

When temporal prediction errs: ERP responses to delayed action-feedback onset

“…Even though no significant differences were observed in the baseline activity before sounds that were self-initiated (after motor correction -cAMC) vs. externally triggered (see Supplementary Material), we cannot fully rule out any contribution of motor activity to sound processing in the cAMC condition. Previous studies found that brain activity before action onset was modulated by the expectation of self-generated sensory consequences (e.g., Reznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018). Specifically, the Readiness Potential preceding a button press was increased (i.e., more negative) when the action produced a sensory effect (AMC) compared to actions with no sensory consequences (MOC) (Reznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018).…”

“…Previous studies found that brain activity before action onset was modulated by the expectation of self-generated sensory consequences (e.g., Reznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018). Specifically, the Readiness Potential preceding a button press was increased (i.e., more negative) when the action produced a sensory effect (AMC) compared to actions with no sensory consequences (MOC) (Reznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018). These findings support the relevance of examining brain activity preceding stimulus onset for a full understanding of the forward model function (e.g., Reznik et al, 2018).…”

Changes in Motor Preparation Affect the Sensory Consequences of Voice Production in Voice Hearers

“…These brain regions are structurally connected to the cerebellum (Haggard et al, 1995), which, in turn, plays a key role in the forward model (Doya, 1999;Ito, 2006;Kawato and Gomi, 1992). Brain activity preceding an action is particularly relevant for investigating the forward model as it was found to contribute to sensory suppression resulting from voluntary actions (Ford et al, 2014a(Ford et al, , 2014bHaggard and Whitford, 2004;Reznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018). Consistent with the notion of an altered formation of the efference copy, the RP is reduced in schizophrenia patients (Ford et al, 2014a(Ford et al, , 2014bLuck et al, 2009;Mathalon et al, 2002;Singh et al, 1992).…”

“…For example, when speaking an efference copy of the voice is sent from sensorimotor brain regions to the auditory system via the cerebellum (Ito, 2008;Wolpert et al, 1998). Preparatory motor activity predicts sensory attenuation of action outcome (Ford et al, 2014a(Ford et al, , 2014bReznik et al, 2018;Vercillo et al, 2018). Consequently, successful prediction of sensory feedback to self-initiated action allows distinguishing self from other actions (Friston, 2012;Heinks-Maldonado et al, 2007;Synofzik et al, 2010) (Supplementary Figure 1).…”

“…The Readiness Potential (RP) is a slow-building negative ERP deflection, starting around 1-2 s prior to a voluntary action (Deecke et al, 1984;Di Russo et al, 2017;Shibasaki and Hallett, 2006). It comprises an early phase, starting roughly 1-2 s before movement onset and associated with the preparation and initiation of the forthcoming action, and a late phase beginning around 500 ms before an action (Deecke et al, 1984;Di Russo et al, 2017;Reznik et al, 2018;Shibasaki and Hallett, 2006;Vercillo et al, 2018). The RP has been associated with increased neural activity spreading from pre-motor regions such as the Supplementary Motor Area [SMA] (early phase) to the primary motor cortex [M1] (late phase) (Ball et al, 1999;Erdler et al, 2000;Praamstra et al, 1996;Weilke et al, 2001;Wildgruber et al, 1997).…”