CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Motor Control and AdaptationFree Will and AgencyTactile and Sensory Interactions

Role of the cerebellum in adaptation to delayed action effects

Open access
Cao, Liyu, Veniero, Domenica, Thut, Gregor, Gross, Joachim·2017·Current Biology
DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2017.06.074PMC PMC5571438
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Actions are typically associated with sensory consequences. For example, knocking at a door results in predictable sounds. These self-initiated sensory stimuli are known to elicit smaller cortical responses compared to passively presented stimuli, e.g., early auditory evoked magnetic fields known as M100 and M200 components are attenuated. Current models implicate the cerebellum in the prediction of the sensory consequences of our actions. However, causal evidence is largely missing. In this study, we introduced a constant delay (of 100 ms) between actions and action-associated sounds, and we recorded magnetoencephalography (MEG) data as participants adapted to the delay. We found an increase in the attenuation of the M100 component over time for self-generated sounds, which indicates cortical adaptation to the introduced delay. In contrast, no change in M200 attenuation was found. Interestingly, disrupting cerebellar activity via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) abolished the adaptation of M100 attenuation, while the M200 attenuation reverses to an M200 enhancement. Our results provide causal evidence for the involvement of the cerebellum in adapting to delayed action effects, and thus in the prediction of the sensory consequences of our actions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2017.06.074

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 59 · Cited by 43

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. [1]Schafer E.W. Marcus M.M. Self-stimulation alters human sensory brain responses Science 181 1973 175 177 4711735
  2. [2]Martikainen M.H. Kaneko K. Hari R. Suppressed responses to self-triggered sounds in the human auditory cortex Cereb. Cortex 15 2005 299 302 15238430
  3. [3]Schröger E. Marzecová A. SanMiguel I. Attention and prediction in human audition: a lesson from cognitive psychophysiology Eur. J. Neurosci. 41 2015 641 664 25728182 PMC4402002
  4. [4]Cao L. Thut G. Gross J. The role of brain oscillations in predicting self-generated sounds Neuroimage 147 2017 895 903 27818209 PMC5315057
  5. [5]Aliu S.O. Houde J.F. Nagarajan S.S. Motor-induced suppression of the auditory cortex J. Cogn. Neurosci. 21 2009 791 802 18593265 PMC2944400
  6. [6]Blakemore S.J. Frith C.D. Wolpert D.M. Spatio-temporal prediction modulates the perception of self-produced stimuli J. Cogn. Neurosci. 11 1999 551 559 10511643
  7. [7]Elijah R.B. Le Pelley M.E. Whitford T.J. Modifying temporal expectations: Changing cortical responsivity to delayed self-initiated sensations with training Biol. Psychol. 120 2016 88 95 27628506
  8. [8]Wolpert D.M. Ghahramani Z. Computational principles of movement neuroscience Nat. Neurosci. 3 Suppl 2000 1212 1217 11127840
  9. [10]Synofzik M. Lindner A. Thier P. The cerebellum updates predictions about the visual consequences of one’s behavior Curr. Biol. 18 2008 814 818 18514520
  10. [11]Izawa J. Criscimagna-Hemminger S.E. Shadmehr R. Cerebellar contributions to reach adaptation and learning sensory consequences of action J. Neurosci. 32 2012 4230 4239 22442085 PMC3326584
  11. [12]Roth M.J. Synofzik M. Lindner A. The cerebellum optimizes perceptual predictions about external sensory events Curr. Biol. 23 2013 930 935 23664970
  12. [13]Kotz S.A. Stockert A. Schwartze M. Cerebellum, temporal predictability and the updating of a mental model Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 369 2014 20130403 25385781 PMC4240970
  13. [14]Moberget T. Karns C.M. Deouell L.Y. Lindgren M. Knight R.T. Ivry R.B. Detecting violations of sensory expectancies following cerebellar degeneration: a mismatch negativity study Neuropsychologia 46 2008 2569 2579 18486157 PMC2588490
  14. [15]Watkins K. Patel N. Davis S. Howell P. Brain activity during altered auditory feedback: an FMRI study in healthy adolescents Neuroimage 26 Supp 1 2005 304 20052400 PMC2801072
  15. [17]Thut G. Miniussi C. Gross J. The functional importance of rhythmic activity in the brain Curr. Biol. 22 2012 R658 R663 22917517
  16. [18]Bäss P. Jacobsen T. Schröger E. Suppression of the auditory N1 event-related potential component with unpredictable self-initiated tones: evidence for internal forward models with dynamic stimulation Int. J. Psychophysiol. 70 2008 137 143 18627782
  17. [19]Mifsud N.G. Beesley T. Watson T.L. Whitford T.J. Attenuation of auditory evoked potentials for hand and eye-initiated sounds Biol. Psychol. 120 2016 61 68 27592269
  18. [20]Knolle F. Schröger E. Baess P. Kotz S.A. The cerebellum generates motor-to-auditory predictions: ERP lesion evidence J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24 2012 698 706 22098261
  19. [21]van Elk M. Salomon R. Kannape O. Blanke O. Suppression of the N1 auditory evoked potential for sounds generated by the upper and lower limbs Biol. Psychol. 102 2014 108 117 25019590
  20. [22]Daliri A. Max L. Modulation of Auditory Responses to Speech vs. Nonspeech Stimuli during Speech Movement Planning Front. Hum. Neurosci. 10 2016 234 27242494 PMC4870268
  21. [23]Horváth J. Maess B. Baess P. Tóth A. Action-sound coincidences suppress evoked responses of the human auditory cortex in EEG and MEG J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24 2012 1919 1931 22360594
  22. [25]Crespo-García M. Zeiller M. Leupold C. Kreiselmeyer G. Rampp S. Hamer H.M. Dalal S.S. Slow-theta power decreases during item-place encoding predict spatial accuracy of subsequent context recall Neuroimage 142 2016 533 543 27521743
  23. [26]Gross J. Timmermann L. Kujala J. Dirks M. Schmitz F. Salmelin R. Schnitzler A. The neural basis of intermittent motor control in humans Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 2002 2299 2302 11854526 PMC122359
  24. [27]Lewis P.A. Miall R.C. Brain activation patterns during measurement of sub- and supra-second intervals Neuropsychologia 41 2003 1583 1592 12887983
  25. [28]Ivry R.B. Spencer R.M. The neural representation of time Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14 2004 225 232 15082329
  26. [29]Chen Z. Chen X. Liu P. Huang D. Liu H. Effect of temporal predictability on the neural processing of self-triggered auditory stimulation during vocalization BMC Neurosci. 13 2012 55 22646514 PMC3444957
  27. [30]Joutsiniemi S.L. Hari R. Omissions of Auditory Stimuli May Activate Frontal Cortex Eur. J. Neurosci. 1 1989 524 528 12106138
  28. [31]Behroozmand R. Liu H. Larson C.R. Time-dependent neural processing of auditory feedback during voice pitch error detection J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23 2011 1205 1217 20146608 PMC3268676
  29. [32]Wang J. Mathalon D.H. Roach B.J. Reilly J. Keedy S.K. Sweeney J.A. Ford J.M. Action planning and predictive coding when speaking Neuroimage 91 2014 91 98 24423729 PMC3965634
  30. [33]Wolpert D.M. Miall R.C. Kawato M. Internal models in the cerebellum Trends Cogn. Sci. 2 1998 338 347 21227230
  31. [36]Blakemore S.J. Frith C.D. Wolpert D.M. The cerebellum is involved in predicting the sensory consequences of action Neuroreport 12 2001 1879 1884 11435916
  32. [37]Stetson C. Cui X. Montague P.R. Eagleman D.M. Motor-sensory recalibration leads to an illusory reversal of action and sensation Neuron 51 2006 651 659 16950162
  33. [38]Timm J. Schönwiesner M. SanMiguel I. Schröger E. Sensation of agency and perception of temporal order Conscious. Cogn. 23 2014 42 52 24362412
  34. [39]Ivry R.B. Keele S.W. Timing functions of the cerebellum J. Cogn. Neurosci. 1 1989 136 152 23968462
  35. [40]Petter E.A. Lusk N.A. Hesslow G. Meck W.H. Interactive roles of the cerebellum and striatum in sub-second and supra-second timing: Support for an initiation, continuation, adjustment, and termination (ICAT) model of temporal processing Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 71 2016 739 755 27773690
  36. [41]Dignath D. Pfister R. Eder A.B. Kiesel A. Kunde W. Representing the hyphen in action-effect associations: automatic acquisition and bidirectional retrieval of action-effect intervals J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 40 2014 1701 1712 24820672
  37. [42]Sokolov A.A. Miall R.C. Ivry R.B. The Cerebellum: Adaptive Prediction for Movement and Cognition Trends Cogn. Sci. 21 2017 313 332 28385461 PMC5477675
  38. [43]Dobromyslin V.I. Salat D.H. Fortier C.B. Leritz E.C. Beckmann C.F. Milberg W.P. McGlinchey R.E. Distinct functional networks within the cerebellum and their relation to cortical systems assessed with independent component analysis Neuroimage 60 2012 2073 2085 22342804 PMC3549335
  39. [44]Sokolov A.A. Erb M. Grodd W. Pavlova M.A. Structural loop between the cerebellum and the superior temporal sulcus: evidence from diffusion tensor imaging Cereb. Cortex 24 2014 626 632 23169930
  40. [45]Schwartze M. Kotz S.A. Contributions of cerebellar event-based temporal processing and preparatory function to speech perception Brain Lang. 161 2016 28 32 26362972
  41. [46]Heron J. Hanson J.V.M. Whitaker D. Effect before cause: supramodal recalibration of sensorimotor timing PLoS ONE 4 2009 e7681 19890383 PMC2766625
  42. [47]Sugano Y. Keetels M. Vroomen J. Adaptation to motor-visual and motor-auditory temporal lags transfer across modalities Exp. Brain Res. 201 2010 393 399 19851760 PMC2832876
  43. [48]Neszmélyi B. Horváth J. Consequences matter: Self-induced tones are used as feedback to optimize tone-eliciting actions Psychophysiology 54 2017 904 915 28240775
  44. [49]Houde J.F. Nagarajan S.S. Sekihara K. Merzenich M.M. Modulation of the auditory cortex during speech: an MEG study J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14 2002 1125 1138 12495520
  45. [50]Müller N. Leske S. Hartmann T. Szebényi S. Weisz N. Listen to yourself: the medial prefrontal cortex modulates auditory alpha power during speech preparation Cereb. Cortex 25 2015 4029 4037 24904068
  46. [51]Oostenveld R. Fries P. Maris E. Schoffelen J.M. FieldTrip: Open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2011 2011 156869 21253357 PMC3021840
  47. [52]Rossi S. Hallett M. Rossini P.M. Pascual-Leone A. Safety of TMS Consensus Group Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research Clin. Neurophysiol. 120 2009 2008 2039 19833552 PMC3260536
  48. [53]Hardwick R.M. Lesage E. Miall R.C. Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation: the role of coil geometry and tissue depth Brain Stimulat. 7 2014 643 649 PMC4180011 24924734
  49. [54]Théoret H. Haque J. Pascual-Leone A. Increased variability of paced finger tapping accuracy following repetitive magnetic stimulation of the cerebellum in humans Neurosci. Lett. 306 2001 29 32 11403950
  50. [55]Baess P. Horváth J. Jacobsen T. Schröger E. Selective suppression of self-initiated sounds in an auditory stream: An ERP study Psychophysiology 48 2011 1276 1283 21449953
  51. [56]Gross J. Baillet S. Barnes G.R. Henson R.N. Hillebrand A. Jensen O. Jerbi K. Litvak V. Maess B. Oostenveld R. Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research Neuroimage 65 2013 349 363 23046981 PMC3925794
  52. [57]Maris E. Oostenveld R. Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data J. Neurosci. Methods 164 2007 177 190 17517438
  53. [58]Besl P.J. McKay N.D. A method for registration of 3-D shapes IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 14 1992 239 256
  54. [59]Nolte G. The magnetic lead field theorem in the quasi-static approximation and its use for magnetoencephalography forward calculation in realistic volume conductors Phys. Med. Biol. 48 2003 3637 3652 14680264

Authors
Cao, L., Veniero, D., Thut, G., & Gross, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Cao, Liyu
ORCID
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
27
Issue
16
Pages
2442-2451.e3
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cub.2017.06.074
PMC
PMC5571438
OpenAlex
W2734808786
Cited by
43
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • University of Glasgow
  • China Scholarship Council
  • Wellcome Trust (098433, 098434)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
cerebellum, action prediction, auditory evoked potentials, self-generated sounds, sensory prediction, transcranial magnetic stimulation, cortical adaptation
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Adult, Auditory Perception, Cerebellum, Female, Humans, Male, Time Factors, Visual Perception, Magnetoencephalography, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review