Spontaneous Fluctuations in Sensory Processing Predict Within-Subject Reaction Time Variability

When engaged in a repetitive task our performance fluctuates from trial-to-trial. In particular, inter-trial reaction time variability has been the subject of considerable research. It has been claimed to be a strong biomarker of attention deficits, increases with frontal dysfunction, and predicts age-related cognitive decline. Thus, rather than being just a consequence of noise in the system, it appears to be under the control of a mechanism that breaks down under certain pathological conditions. Although the underlying mechanism is still an open question, consensual hypotheses are emerging regarding the neural correlates of reaction time inter-trial intra-individual variability. Sensory processing, in particular, has been shown to covary with reaction time, yet the spatio-temporal profile of the moment-to-moment variability in sensory processing is still poorly characterized. The goal of this study was to characterize the intra-individual variability in the time course of single-trial visual evoked potentials and its relationship with inter-trial reaction time variability. For this, we chose to take advantage of the high temporal resolution of the electroencephalogram (EEG) acquired while participants were engaged in a 2-choice reaction time task. We studied the link between single trial event-related potentials (ERPs) and reaction time using two different analyses: (1) time point by time point correlation analyses thereby identifying time windows of interest; and (2) correlation analyses between single trial measures of peak latency and amplitude and reaction time. To improve extraction of single trial ERP measures related with activation of the visual cortex, we used an independent component analysis (ICA) procedure. Our ERP analysis revealed a relationship between the N1 visual evoked potential and reaction time. The earliest time point presenting a significant correlation of its respective amplitude with reaction time occurred 175 ms after stimulus onset, just after the onset of the N1 peak. Interestingly, single trial N1 latency correlated significantly with reaction time, while N1 amplitude did not. In conclusion, our findings suggest that inter-trial variability in the timing of extrastriate visual processing contributes to reaction time variability.

[1]  T. Hendler,et al.  Towards a Neuroscience of Mind-Wandering , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[2]  Y. Ejima,et al.  Estimation of the Timing of Human Visual Perception from Magnetoencephalography , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Cortical sources of the early components of the visual evoked potential , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[4]  Barak A. Pearlmutter,et al.  Linear Spatial Integration for Single-Trial Detection in Encephalography , 2002, NeuroImage.

[5]  Stephen Darling,et al.  Intraindividual reaction time variability affects P300 amplitude rather than latency , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[6]  Christoph Klein,et al.  Variability of single trial brain activation predicts fluctuations in reaction time , 2015, Biological Psychology.

[7]  Christopher W. N. Saville,et al.  Is reaction time variability consistent across sensory modalities? Insights from latent variable analysis of single-trial P3b latencies , 2012, Biological Psychology.

[8]  S. MacDonald,et al.  Intra-individual variability in behavior: links to brain structure, neurotransmission and neuronal activity , 2006, Trends in Neurosciences.

[9]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[10]  S. Makeig,et al.  Mining event-related brain dynamics , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  Julia Kastner,et al.  Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing , 2005 .

[12]  E. Vogel,et al.  The visual N1 component as an index of a discrimination process. , 2000, Psychophysiology.

[13]  S. Makeig,et al.  Imaging human EEG dynamics using independent component analysis , 2006, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[14]  Marty G. Woldorff,et al.  Momentary reductions of attention permit greater processing of irrelevant stimuli , 2009, NeuroImage.

[15]  Kristina M. Visscher,et al.  The neural bases of momentary lapses in attention , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[16]  Stephen G. Lisberger,et al.  Signal, Noise, and Variation in Neural and Sensory-Motor Latency , 2016, Neuron.

[17]  Christoph Klein,et al.  Increased reaction time variability in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder as a response-related phenomenon: evidence from single-trial event-related potentials. , 2015, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[18]  R. Blair,et al.  An alternative method for significance testing of waveform difference potentials. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

[19]  Maarten De Vos,et al.  Let's face it, from trial to trial: Comparing procedures for N170 single-trial estimation , 2012, NeuroImage.

[20]  P. Rousseeuw Least Median of Squares Regression , 1984 .

[21]  Kiti Müller,et al.  Relationship of P300 single-trial responses with reaction time and preceding stimulus sequence. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[22]  Markus Junghöfer,et al.  The categorization of natural scenes: Brain attention networks revealed by dense sensor ERPs , 2006, NeuroImage.

[23]  S. Luck,et al.  Attention to Features Precedes Attention to Locations in Visual Search: Evidence from Electromagnetic Brain Responses in Humans , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  Guillaume A. Rousselet,et al.  Robust Correlation Analyses: False Positive and Power Validation Using a New Open Source Matlab Toolbox , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[25]  Steven A. Hillyard,et al.  The Role of Spatial Attention in the Selection of Real and Illusory Objects , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  A. Kok On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[27]  G. McCarthy,et al.  Augmenting mental chronometry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. , 1977, Science.

[28]  R. VanRullen,et al.  This Is the Rhythm of Your Eyes: The Phase of Ongoing Electroencephalogram Oscillations Modulates Saccadic Reaction Time , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  S Makeig,et al.  Functionally independent components of early event-related potentials in a visual spatial attention task. , 1999, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[30]  Christoph Klein,et al.  Electrocortical correlates of intra-subject variability in reaction times: Average and single-trial analyses , 2011, Biological Psychology.

[31]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  An Information-Maximization Approach to Blind Separation and Blind Deconvolution , 1995, Neural Computation.

[32]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[33]  David M. Groppe,et al.  Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields I: a critical tutorial review. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[34]  Robert Desimone,et al.  Lesions of prefrontal cortex reduce attentional modulation of neuronal responses and synchrony in V4 , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[35]  Jérôme Prado,et al.  Variations of response time in a selective attention task are linked to variations of functional connectivity in the attentional network , 2011, NeuroImage.

[36]  T. Wasaka,et al.  Changes in the somatosensory N250 and P300 by the variation of reaction time , 2003, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[37]  E Gordon,et al.  Fast and slow reaction time changes reflected in ERP brain function. , 1998, The International journal of neuroscience.

[38]  P. Sajda,et al.  Temporal characterization of the neural correlates of perceptual decision making in the human brain. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[39]  F. Di Russo,et al.  Electrophysiological analysis of cortical mechanisms of selective attention to high and low spatial frequencies , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[40]  Christopher W. N. Saville,et al.  Elevated P3b latency variability in carriers of ZNF804A risk allele for psychosis , 2015, NeuroImage.

[41]  E. Ziegel Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing (2nd ed.) , 2005 .