The hidden side of intentional action: the role of the anterior insular cortex

Braß, Marcel; Haggard, Patrick

doi:10.1007/s00429-010-0269-6

Cited by 91 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The anterior insula (AI), together with frontal operculum and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), is one of the most consistently activated regions in response to errors, negative feedback, and conflict (for a recent review, see Koban et al, 2013a;Koban et al, 2013b;Nee et al, 2007;Ullsperger et al, 2010), but its role remains unspecified in most models of action and conflict monitoring (for exceptions see Brass and Haggard 2010;Ullsperger et al, 2010). Using an anti-saccade task, Klein et al (2007) showed that the left AI is more activated for aware than unaware errors.…”

Section: Functional Brain Imaging Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given the involvement of AI in emotions and the representation of bodily states of self and others (Craig, 2009;Kober et al, 2008;Lamm et al, 2011;Singer et al, 2009), it may be implicated in the affective component of error and outcome processing (Brass and Haggard, 2010), as outlined in the next sections.…”

Section: Functional Brain Imaging Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other regions, especially AI and lateral prefrontal cortex are activated by emotional, social, and error monitoring processes as well, and might therefore also constitute important hubs between different systems (Pessoa, 2008;Sridharan et al, 2008) and for convergence between action monitoring and socio-affective information (Brass and Haggard, 2010;Koban et al, 2013a;Ullsperger et al, 2010). In the following sections, we describe behavioral and neurophysiological evidence for affective and social influences on action monitoring, and interactions of these processes in dMFC and AI.…”

Section: --Please Insert Figure 2 About Here --mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This means not only marking response errors as bad, but also identifying correct actions as good events. This dynamic process, directly linking actions and outcomes to positive and negative affective states (see also Brass and Haggard, 2010;Craig, 2009;Ullsperger et al, 2010) appears especially important to promote learning and to enable adaptive behavior in an ever-changing and complex environment.…”

Section: Evidence From Affective Priming Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Koban

Pourtois

2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

156

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(max 170 words)Action monitoring allows the swift detection of conflicts, errors, and the rapid evaluation of outcomes. These processes are crucial for learning, adaptive behavior, and for the regulation of cognitive control. Our review discusses neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies that have explored the contribution of emotional and social factors during action monitoring. Metaanalytic brain activation maps demonstrate reliable overlap of error monitoring, emotional, and social processes in the dorsal mediofrontal cortex (dMFC), lateral prefrontal areas, and anterior insula (AI). Cumulating evidence suggests that action monitoring is modulated by trait anxiety and negative affect, and that activity of the dMFC and the amygdala during action monitoring might contribute to the 'affective tagging' of actions along a valence dimension. The role of AI in action monitoring may be the integration of outcome information with self-agency and social context factors, thereby generating more complex situation-specific and conscious emotional feeling states. Our review suggests that action-monitoring processes operate at multiple levels in the human brain, and are shaped by dynamic interactions with affective and social processes.Keywords: Anterior insula; dorsal cingulate cortex; mediofrontal cortex; amygdala; error monitoring; ERN; feedback processing; social cognition; emotions; cognitive control; emotioncognition interactions; meta-analysis 3 Overview and motivationIn order to adapt their behavior, to detect and learn from errors, and ultimately to increase their chances of survival, humans and other animals have to monitor their actions (Rabbitt, 1966). Flexible regulation of behavior requires its constant evaluation in terms of performance and outcomes, as well as in terms of costs and future consequences. Action and error monitoring have been studied for several decades in psychology and neuroscience (for previous reviews see (Etkin et al., 2011;Moser et al., 2013;Pessoa, 2008;Proudfit et al., 2013;Shackman et al., 2011;Shenhav et al., 2013), we propose that error and action monitoring is an intrinsically affective and social process. However, we show that meta-analytic activation maps support overlapping brain responses to error processing, emotional, and social information processing not only in dMFC, but also in several other brain regions, including anterior insula and lateral prefrontal cortex.Further, recent intracranial electrophysiological recordings showed error-related activity in the amygdala, suggesting this limbic region may contribute to affective responses to errors and negative action outcomes. In the closing part, we outline an integrative framework for 4 understanding the brain systems underlying affective and social interactions with action monitoring, which may be crucial to foster behavioral control in real life.

show abstract

Section: Functional Brain Imaging Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Functional Brain Imaging Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: --Please Insert Figure 2 About Here --mentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Evidence From Affective Priming Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Koban

Pourtois

2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

156

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These constructs, along with response inhibition, may require integration of sensory and interoceptive cues to guide cognitive and motor responses, evaluate outcomes, and adjust behavior (Brass and Haggard, 2010). Disruption to such processes may contribute to addiction vulnerability.…”

Section: Sex Differences In Effects Of Family Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Correlates of Impulsivity in Healthy Males and Females with Family Histories of Alcoholism

DeVito

Meda

Jiantonio

et al. 2013

Neuropsychopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals family-history positive (FHP) for alcoholism have increased risk for the disorder, which may be mediated by intermediate behavioral traits such as impulsivity. Given the sex differences in the risk for and clinical presentation of addictive disorders, risk for addiction may be differentially mediated by impulsivity within FHP males and females. FHP (N ¼ 28) and family-history negative (FHN, N ¼ 31) healthy, non-substance-abusing adults completed an fMRI Go/No-Go task and were assessed on impulsivity and alcohol use. Effects of family history and sex were investigated as were associations between neural correlates of impulse control and out-ofscanner measures of impulsivity and alcohol use. FHP individuals showed greater activation in the left anterior insula and inferior frontal gyrus during successful inhibitions, an effect that was driven primarily by FHP males. Higher self-reported impulsivity and behavioral discounting impulsivity, but not alcohol use measures, were associated with greater BOLD signal in the region that differentiated the FHP and FHN groups. Impulsivity factors were associated with alcohol use measures across the FHP and FHN groups. These findings are consistent with increased risk for addiction among FHP individuals being conferred through disrupted function within neural systems important for impulse control. Keywords: impulsivity; family history of alcoholism; insula; inferior frontal gyrus (IFG); addiction; sex differences. INTRODUCTIONAlcohol use disorders (AUDs) are prevalent and associated with detrimental health and societal outcomes (Li, 2008). Individuals with a family history of alcoholism (familyhistory positive (FHP)) have increased risk for alcoholism driven by genetic and environmental factors (Lieb et al, 2002;Slutske et al, 2002). Healthy FHPs model addiction vulnerability without confounding effects of excess alcohol on cognition and brain function.Increased AUD risk among FHPs may be conferred via heritable impulsive tendencies (Dick et al, 2010;Tessner and Hill, 2010). Impulsivity is a multi-factorial construct, where distinct sub-components appear to have differential neural bases and relationships with addiction (de Wit, 2009;Lejuez et al, 2010;Rogers et al, 2010). Aspects of impulsivity may both predispose to and be exacerbated by addictive behaviors. Impulsivity predicts development of AUDs; is higher in FHPs with more alcohol-dependent relatives (ie higher family-history load); and partially mediates the relationship between FHP and alcohol and substance use disorder (for review, see de Wit, 2009;Dick et al, 2010;Lejuez et al, 2010;Verdejo-Garcia et al, 2008). Other less well-studied impulsivity-related constructs (eg, sensationseeking, risk-taking, compulsivity, behavioural activation/ inhibition, reward/punishment sensitivity) have been related to addiction vulnerability, and addictions therefore warrant consideration (eg, Meda et al, 2009).Sex differences are important to consider as they are observable for rates, clinical presentation, and health cons...

show abstract

Functional lateralization of the anterior insula during feedback processing

Späti

Chumbley

Brakowski

et al. 2014

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective adaptive behavior rests on an appropriate understanding of how much responsibility we have over outcomes in the environment. This attribution of agency to ourselves or to an external event influences our behavioral and affective response to the outcomes. Despite its special importance to understanding human motivation and affect, the neural mechanisms involved in self-attributed rewards and punishments remain unclear. Previous evidence implicates the anterior insula (AI) in evaluating the consequences of our own actions. However, it is unclear if the AI has a general role in feedback evaluation (positive and negative) or plays a specific role during error processing. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging and a motion prediction task, we investigate neural responses to self- and externally attributed monetary gains and losses. We found that attribution effects vary according to the valence of feedback: significant valence × attribution interactions in the right AI, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the midbrain, and the right ventral putamen. Self-attributed losses were associated with increased activity in the midbrain, the ACC and the right AI, and negative BOLD response in the ventral putamen. However, higher BOLD activity to self-attributed feedback (losses and gains) was observed in the left AI, the thalamus, and the cerebellar vermis. These results suggest a functional lateralization of the AI. The right AI, together with the midbrain and the ACC, is mainly involved in processing the salience of the outcome, whereas the left is part of a cerebello-thalamic-cortical pathway involved in cognitive control processes important for subsequent behavioral adaptations.

show abstract

The hidden side of intentional action: the role of the anterior insular cortex

Cited by 91 publications

References 53 publications

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Neural Correlates of Impulsivity in Healthy Males and Females with Family Histories of Alcoholism

Functional lateralization of the anterior insula during feedback processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About