Search

How do we recognize ourselves as the agents of our actions? Do we use the same error detection mechanisms to monitor self-generated vs. externally imposed actions? Using event-related brain potentials (ERPs), we identified two different error-monitoring loops involved in providing a coherent sense of the agency of our actions. In the first ERP experiment, the participants were embodied in a virtual body (avatar) while performing an error-prone fast reaction time task. Crucially, in certain trials, participants were deceived regarding their own actions, i.e., the avatar movement did not match the participant's movement. Self-generated real errors and false (avatar) errors showed very different ERP signatures and with different processing latencies: while real errors showed a classical frontal-central error-related negativity (Ne/ERN), peaking 100ms after error commission, false errors elicited a larger and delayed parietal negative component (at about 350-400ms). The violation of the sense of agency elicited by false avatar errors showed a strong similarity to ERP signatures related to semantic or conceptual violations (N400 component). In a follow-up ERP control experiment, a subset of the same participants merely acted as observers of the avatar correct and error movements. This experimental situation did not elicit the N400 component associated with agency violation. Thus, the results show a clear neural dissociation between internal and external error-monitoring loops responsible for distinguishing our self-generated errors from those imposed externally, opening new avenues for the study of the mental processes underlying the integration of internal and sensory feedback information while being actors of our own actions.

The ability of different groups of cortical neurons to engage in causal interactions that are at once differentiated and integrated results in complex dynamic patterns. Complexity is low during periods of unconsciousness (deep sleep, anesthesia, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome) in which the brain tends to generate a stereotypical pattern consisting of alternating active and silent periods of neural activity—slow oscillations— and is high during wakefulness. But how is cortical complexity built up? Is it a continuum? An open question is whether cortical complexity can vary within the same brain state. Here we recorded with 32-channel multielectrode arrays from the cortical surface of the mouse and used both spontaneous dynamics (wave propagation entropy and functional complexity) and a perturbational approach (a variation of the perturbation complexity index) to measure complexity at different anesthesia levels. Variations in anesthesia level within the bistable regime of slow oscillations (0.1–1.5 Hz) resulted in a modulation of the slow oscillation frequency. Both perturbational and spontaneous complexity increased with decreasing anesthesia levels, in correlation with the decrease in coherence of the underlying network. Changes in complexity level are related to, but not dependent on, changes in excitability. We conclude that cortical complexity can vary within a single brain state dominated by slow oscillations, building up to the higher complexity associated with consciousness. Funded by EU H2020 Research and Innovation Programme, Grant 785907 (HBP SGA2) and 945539 (HBP SGA3) to MVSV and to MM, BFU2017-85048-R (MINECO) and SloW-Dyn FLAGERA-PCIN-2015-162-C02-01 to MVSV. IDIBAPS is supported by CERCA (Generalitat de Catalunya) to MVSV.