Dynamic analysis of EEG signals during spatial working memory used for either perception discrimination or planning of action

We analysed multi-channel electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings during a spatial Working Memory (WM) task in order to test the hypothesis that segmentation of perception and action is present when the visual stimulus has been stored in spatial WM. To detect the interactions between different regions of the brain depending on the task we employed both Short Time Fourier Transformation (STFT) and the concept of Granger Causality (GC). Our computational analysis supports evidence that the Parietal Cortex (PC) is involved in WM processing.

[1]  A Baddeley,et al.  The fractionation of working memory. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  Peter König,et al.  On the directionality of cortical interactions studied by structural analysis of electrophysiological recordings , 1999, Biological Cybernetics.

[3]  G. Schwarz.  Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[4]  M. Goodale,et al.  Separate visual pathways for perception and action , 1992, Trends in Neurosciences.

[5]  Hualou Liang,et al.  Short-window spectral analysis of cortical event-related potentials by adaptive multivariate autoregressive modeling: data preprocessing, model validation, and variability assessment , 2000, Biological Cybernetics.

[6]  Ingrid R. Olson,et al.  Some surprising findings on the involvement of the parietal lobe in human memory , 2009, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[7]  M. Goodale,et al.  An evolving view of duplex vision: separate but interacting cortical pathways for perception and action , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[8]  H. Akaike.  A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[9]  C. Granger.  Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods , 1969 .

[10]  K. J. Blinowska,et al.  The application of parametric multichannel spectral estimates in the study of electrical brain activity , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[11]  Peter B. Delahunt,et al.  The Influence of Perceptual Training on Working Memory in Older Adults , 2010, PloS one.

[12]  Jesper Tegnér,et al.  Mechanism for top-down control of working memory capacity , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  J. Geweke,et al.  Measurement of Linear Dependence and Feedback between Multiple Time Series , 1982 .

[14]  Régine Le Bouquin-Jeannès,et al.  Linear and nonlinear causality between signals: methods, examples and neurophysiological applications , 2006, Biological Cybernetics.

[15]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[16]  S. Bressler,et al.  Frequency decomposition of conditional Granger causality and application to multivariate neural field potential data , 2006, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[17]  S. Bressler,et al.  Beta oscillations in a large-scale sensorimotor cortical network: directional influences revealed by Granger causality. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  M. Kaminski,et al.  Granger causality and information flow in multivariate processes. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[19]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  Distinguishing Causal Interactions in Neural Populations , 2007, Neural Computation.

[20]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  Causal networks in simulated neural systems , 2008, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[21]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  A MATLAB toolbox for Granger causal connectivity analysis , 2010, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[22]  E. Vogel,et al.  Capacity limit of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex , 2004 .