Our laboratory studies the mechanisms by which highly complex behaviors are mediated at the neuronal level, mainly focusing on the example of dynamic social interactions and the neural circuits that drive them. From dyadic interactions to group dynamics and collective decision making, the lab seeks a mechanistic understanding for the fundamental building blocks of societies, such as cooperation, empathy, fairness and reciprocity.
The computations underlying social interactions are highly distributed across many brain areas. Our lab is interested in which specific areas are involved in a particular function, why such an architecture arises and how activity in multiple networks is coordinated. Our goal is to develop a roadmap of the social brain and use it for guiding restorative treatments for conditions in which social behavior is impaired, such as Autism Spectrum Disorders and Schizophrenia.
A cornerstone of successful social interchange is the ability to anticipate each other's intentions or actions. While generating these internal predictions is essential for constructive social behavior, their single neuronal basis and causal underpinnings are unknown. Here, we discover specific neurons in the primate dorsal anterior cingulate that selectively predict an opponent's yet unknown decision to invest in their common good or defect and distinct neurons that encode the monkey's own current decision based on prior outcomes. Mixed population predictions of the other was remarkably near optimal compared to behavioral decoders. Moreover, disrupting cingulate activity selectively biased mutually beneficial interactions between the monkeys but, surprisingly, had no influence on their decisions when no net-positive outcome was possible. These findings identify a group of other-predictive neurons in the primate anterior cingulate essential for enacting cooperative interactions and may pave a way toward the targeted treatment of social behavioral disorders.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2015.01.045
View details for Web of Science ID 000351951800021
View details for PubMedID 25728667
It is well established that cognitive system overload is reflected in the attentional blink (AB), the failure to report a second target when it closely follows detection of a first target within a rapid series of stimuli. However, there is intense controversy concerning the effect of first-target detection in one modality on subsequent dynamics of attentional resources in other modalities. Mixed results were found using an audiovisual AB paradigm: depletion of resources in one modality either impaired performance in the other modality or had no effect. Here, we circumvent the need for task switching by measuring an event-related potential, the mismatch negativity, which reflects implicit auditory change detection without requiring task engagement and is present even for background sounds that participants ignore. Surprisingly, we find that during the visual AB, auditory processing is enhanced rather than inhibited, as would be expected by system overload. We suggest that multimodal attentional resources may be freed rather than engaged during the visual AB. Suppression of irrelevant input may require active control by a central executive, which is preoccupied during the visual AB, and/or there may be no reason to suppress other-modal input since the visual system will miss its second target anyway.
View details for DOI 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0420-10.2011
View details for Web of Science ID 000286373700017
View details for PubMedID 21248117
Even when our attention is dedicated to an important task, background processes monitor the environment for significant events. The mismatch negativity (MMN) event-related potential is thought to reflect such a monitoring process. Nevertheless, there is continuing debate concerning the susceptibility of the MMN to attentional manipulation. We investigated the trial-by-trial relationship between brain activity related to change detection, reflected in the MMN, and visual psychophysical performance--while varying task difficulty. We find that auditory change detection is indeed "automatic" in that MMN remains robust despite increasing (visual) task load. However, the MMN amplitude and latency are susceptible to both visual load and to momentary attentional fluctuations as reflected in success or failure to identify a following visual target. We conclude that background central auditory processing is sensitive to the demands of a visual task, and fluctuates based on moment-to-moment allocation of attentional resources to the visual task.
View details for Web of Science ID 000279057500007
View details for PubMedID 19580389
