Search

Psychostimulants, such as methylphenidate, are thought to improve information processing in motivation-reward and attention-activation networks by enhancing the effects of more relevant signals and suppressing those of less relevant ones; however the nature of such reciprocal influences remains poorly understood. To explore this question, we tested the effect of methylphenidate on performance and associated brain activity in the Anticipation, Conflict, Reward (ACR) task. Sixteen healthy adult volunteers, ages 21-45, were scanned twice using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they performed the ACR task under placebo and methylphenidate conditions. A three-way repeated measures analysis of variance, with cue (reward vs. non-reward), target (congruent vs. incongruent) and medication condition (methylphenidate vs. placebo) as the factors, was used to analyze behaviors on the task. Blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) signals, reflecting task-related neural activity, were evaluated using linear contrasts. Participants exhibited significantly greater accuracy in the methylphenidate condition than the placebo condition. Compared with placebo, the methylphenidate condition also was associated with lesser task-related activity in components of attention-activation systems irrespective of the reward cue, and less task-related activity in components of the reward-motivation system, particularly the insula, during reward trials irrespective of target difficulty. These results suggest that methylphenidate enhances task performance by improving efficiency of information processing in both reward-motivation and in attention-activation systems.

How can one conciliate the claim that humans are uncertainty minimizing systems that seek to navigate predictable and familiar environments with the claim that humans can be creative? We call this the Enlightened Room Problem (ERP). The solution, we suggest, lies not (or not only) in the error-minimizing brain but in the environment itself. Creativity emerges from various degrees of interplay between predictive brains and changing environments: ones that repeatedly move the goalposts for our own error-minimizing machinery. By (co)constructing these challenging worlds, we effectively alter and expand the space within which our own prediction engines operate, and that function as 'exploration bubbles' that enable information seeking, uncertainty minimizing minds to penetrate deeper and deeper into artistic, scientific and engineering space. In what follows, we offer a proof of principle for this kind of environmentally led cognitive expansion. This article is part of the theme issue 'Art, aesthetics and predictive processing: theoretical and empirical perspectives'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How to account for the power that art holds over us? Why do artworks touch us deeply, consoling, transforming or invigorating us in the process? In this paper, we argue that an answer to this question might emerge from a fecund framework in cognitive science known as predictive processing (a.k.a. active inference). We unpack how this approach connects sense-making and aesthetic experiences through the idea of an 'epistemic arc', consisting of three parts (curiosity, epistemic action and aha experiences), which we cast as aspects of active inference. We then show how epistemic arcs are built and sustained by artworks to provide us with those satisfying experiences that we tend to call 'aesthetic'. Next, we defuse two key objections to this approach; namely, that it places undue emphasis on the cognitive component of our aesthetic encounters—at the expense of affective aspects—and on closure and uncertainty minimization (order)—at the expense of openness and lingering uncertainty (change). We show that the approach offers crucial resources to account for the open-ended, free and playful behaviour inherent in aesthetic experiences. The upshot is a promising but deflationary approach, both philosophically informed and psychologically sound, that opens new empirical avenues for understanding our aesthetic encounters. This article is part of the theme issue 'Art, aesthetics and predictive processing: theoretical and empirical perspectives'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]