Back

Motor-evoked neural responses in auditory cortex are associated with improved sensitivity to self-generated sounds

Reznik, D.; Hacohen, N.; Buaron, B.; Zion Golumbic, E.; Mukamel, R.

2020-03-25 neuroscience
10.1101/2020.03.25.002485 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Sensory perception is a product of complex interactions between the internal state of an organism and the physical attributes of a stimulus. One factor that modulates the internal state of the perceiving agent is voluntary movement. It has been shown across the animal kingdom that perception and sensory-evoked physiological responses are modulated depending on whether or not the stimulus is the consequence of voluntary actions. These phenomena are often attributed to motor signals sent to relevant sensory regions (efference copies), that convey information about expected upcoming sensory consequences. However, to date, there is no direct evidence in humans for efferent signals underlying these motor-sensory interactions. In the current study we recorded neurophysiological (using Magnetoencephalography) and behavioral responses from 16 healthy subjects performing an auditory detection task of faint tones. Tones were either generated by subjects voluntary button presses or occurred predictably following a visual cue. By introducing a constant temporal delay between button press/cue and tone delivery and applying source-level analysis we decoupled motor-evoked and auditory-evoked activity in auditory cortex. We show motor-related evoked-responses in auditory cortex following sound-triggering actions and preceding sound onset. Such evoked-responses were not found for button-presses that were not coupled with expected sounds. Furthermore, the amplitude of these evoked-responses corresponded with subsequent sound detection, suggesting their functional relevance to auditory processing. Our results provide first direct evidence for efferent signals in sensory cortex that are evoked by voluntary actions coupled with sensory consequences.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.