Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Behavioural Neuroscience - Responses - Coggle Diagram
Behavioural Neuroscience - Responses
Why
Why Care
Well designed experiment & meaningful behavioural responses
Provide window to mind
Understand brain activity
Constrains interpretation
Limit of fMRI
Excitement in field for last 20-30 years
But limited recognition how important behaviour is to understand brain activity
fMRI & field relatively recent
First cog fMRI experiment in 1999
Blobs on Brain
Scan brains to figure out what happening
Pleasure, reward, love
Responses
Direct measures of behaviour
Example: Responses
Reaction time/accuracy
Eye movement
Galvanic skin response
Grasp & muscle movement
Body motion
Bio motion
Reaction TIme
Reaction Time
Provide upper limit on neural processing time
Give some comparison between amount of time needed to process diff stimuli
Performances when manipulate stimuli
Insight into what important when processing
But cannot be sure diff in timing due to which stage
Study: Changes in Attentional Control (Imanian et al., 2025)
Effect of eSport on attention, working memory, & cogntive flexibility
Used Stroop task
FIFA improve attention & working memory in single-player & co-op groups
Cognitive flexibility only increase in co-op groups
Process/Stages
Detect stimulus
Recognise stimulus & make decision
Plan & execute motor command
Factors that Guide Visual Search
Search not overwhelmed
Bottom-up salience
Top-down feature guidance
Scene structure
Perceived value
Previous search history
Search Not Overwhelmed
By no. objects
Is guided to subset of all possible objects by several sources of info
Bottom-Up Salience
Stimulus-driven guidance
Top-Down Feature Guidance
Direct attention
Scene Structure
Direct attention
Perceived Value
Of items
Of features
Measuring Reaction Time
Button Press
Voice
Analyse verbal response time
Eye movement
Voice
Stroop task
Example: Stroop Task (Stroop, 1935)
Asked for one of two things
Name colour of ink
Read word
Given 1 of 3 possible stimuli
Colour & name same
Colour & name diff
2 measures from response based on disconstant response & time to respond
Accuracy (error rate)
Time to respond (usually msec)
Reaction Time vs Errors
Most studies use reaction time measures
Some interesting studies involve learning
Colour & shape combination
Error counts also useful
What Results Tell
Attentional control of verbal action
Inhibition of verbal responses
Automaticity of processing
Words vs colours
Timing of processing in brain
Stroop Effect Time Course (Glaser & Glaser, 1982)
M: Name target w. congruent/incongruent distractor before/after
R: Reaction time slower in incongruent target
Limitation of Stroop Effect
Difficult task
Repeating it may have practice effects
Need control condition to show practice effects not present
Depending on student type may have experience w. text
Novelty effect
Example: D-KEFS Colour-Word Interference Task
M: Four conditions to test inhibition & cog flexibility in baseline & higher-level
Colour naming
Word reading
Inhibition
Inhibition/switching
Record errors & completion time to convert to scaled scores
Contrast scores
Corrected & uncorrected errors
What Results Tell
Successful performance in condition 4 requires good higher-level performance
Naming & reading speed
Verbal inhibition
Cog flexibility
Baseline
Colour naming
Word reading
Higher-Order
Inhibition
Colour inconsistent w. name
Inhibition & switching
Colour inconsistent w. name
Name colour/word dependent on presence of box
Example: Stroop Colour Word Task
Four conditions
Plain words shown
Colourful words shown & word read
Colours shown
Colourful words shown & colour named
Eye Movement
Visual search
Eye movement
Study: Guidance of Visual Search (Worfe & Horowitz, 2017)
A: Search for target 'T' within 'L's
M: Two conditions to search in
All letters same colour
Half letters diff colour
R: Reaction time quixker w. smaller visual set size measured by index of guidance
Same colour = N = ms per item
Half diff colour = N/2 x ms per item
Bottom-Up Guidance by Salience
Basic orientation features direct attention
In bottom-up processing
May be important for object recognition but not direct attention
Pop out effective guidance w. near zero slope of reaction time x set size function
Example: Guidance Features
Colour
Orientation
Closure
Open vs closed shapes
Top-Down Guidance
Feature based attention
Search efficiency dependent on no. features shared by target & distractor
Less efficient if more salient to vision
Limited no. attributes
Some stimulus propoerties modulate effectiveness of other deatures
Example: Limited
Colour
Motion
Size
Orientation
Shape
Example: Modulate
Depth modulates size
Arrows
Emotion
Posner Cueing Paradigm (Posner, 1980)
M: Fixate between boxes & move eyes as fast as possible to target
Cue w. congruent/incongruent arrow before stimuli appear
Significance
Speed of processing implies processing steps
Simple reaction times the starting point for brain studies
Search for target localised neural activity before stimulis onset
Boost signal for attended stimuli
Study: Emotion as Top-Down (Gerritsen et al., 2008)
B: 10s less to pick out hostile face than peaceful in lineup
A: Reaction time to take out unique face
M: Identify unique item w. space bar
Peaceful
Hostile
R: Reaction time depend on emotion
Hostile take longer than peaceful
Study: Guidance by Scene Properties (Wolfe)
A: If search time restricted by guidance
M: Find human in scene
Syntactic guidance
Semantic guidance
R: Feature guidance & scene guidance work together
Determine effective set size
Types of Guidance
Syntactic
Semantic
Semantic Guidance
Meaning of scene
Where item searched for make logical sense to be
Syntatctic Guidance
Physical constraints
Where item searched for physically can be
Effective Set Size
Define set size of scene
Study: Scene Specific Attentional Guance (Wolfe et al., 2012)
A: Effect of set size & familiarity w. scene
R: Search more efficient depending on object searched for
Very efficient overall
More efficient for random objects outside scene setting
R: Search more efficient depending on familiarity
Increased familiarity have moderate increase
Repetition of items have large increase
Implication
Scene specific guidance of attention eliminate most regions for effective set size of items that could be target
Other factor in play other than set size during search & identify
Use of info makes search more efficient
Function of Testing
Ageing
Attentional Control
Cog Impairment (Zhu et al., 2025)
Ps: 60-85 years
10 w. mild cog impairment
10 w. normal cog
M: Colour-word Stroop task w. auditory responses recorded
Test accuracy & reaction tme
R: Accuracy sig diff between groups in task D
No sig diff between groups for tasks A, B, & C
Implication
Mild cog impairment struggle w. attentional control & interference suppression
Montreal Cognitive Assessment
Measures cog impairment
Scores >26 = Normal ageing
Scores 18 - 26 = Mild cog impairment
Study:P Attentional COntrol (Imanian et al., 2025)
B: Gamers develop capacity to effectively utilise task-relevant info while suppressing irrelevant/distracting inputs
A: Reaction time & accuracy of gamers
P: 40 UG students w. no previous experince of Esport
M: 8 weeks playing fifa in single/coop, stroop task assessed w. 96 congruent & incongruent words
R: Reaction time decreased & accuracy increased
Reaction time in co-player in congruent & incongruent
Accuracy in single & coplayer in congruent & incongruent
Eye Movement
Eye Tracking
Online & explicit measure of visual & cog processing
Often marker of attention
Eye Tracking Tools
Head mounted
Head-chin rest
Glasses
Screen integrated
Study: Single Saccade Detection (Kirchner & Thorpe, 2006)
A: Measure saccadic eye meovement in scene
M: Present natural scene w./w.out animals; Measure w. EOG
R: Reaction time depend on scence
As low as 120ms
Eye Tracking (Tobii T120)
Eye tracker used in office & home environments
Applications
Autism
Social communication
Speech development
Study: Social Communication
Faces
Interaction
Study: Interaction (Durant, 2016)
No. fixations in pre-defined region of interest
Key quant method to describe interaction b etween humans
Used in wide range of scenarios
Study: Faces (Yarbus, 1967)
A: Describe in detail
Typical patterns on faces
Task dependence
M: Eye tracking of fixations
Dot represent single fixation
Size of dot represent fixation length
Study: Visual Speech Cues (Kushnrenko et al., 2013)
A: Visual attention to faces during audio visual processing of speech
P: Infants 6-9 months w. follow up at 14-16 months
M: Measure congruent & incongruent visual speech cues
R: Speech processing efficiency predicted language scores
Infants less efficient had lower scores at 14 months
Study: Autism (Norbury et al., 2009)
P: Autistic individuals
W. age-appropriate language abilities
W. additional language impairment
R: Language abilities related to time viewing eyes
Age appropriate spent less time viewing eyes
Additional did not differ from neurotypical peers
R: Measures related to social communication
Eye-movement not associated w. social outcomes
Increased viewing to mouth associated w. greater communication competence
Implication
Integrating cues from eyes & mouth may support communication
Acquired Brain Injury
Affect 40,000 childre each year in UK
Impairs decision making & planning
Slows info processing related to trauma
Testing
Traditional test batteries/questionnaire
Pilot adult eye-tracking study
Traditional
Difficulty w. anxiety/oppositional behaviour/fatigue
Reloationship w. therapist
Parent anxiety may affect proxy report
Limits to Testing
Often in hospital setting
Long
P often not in state for deep testing
Guess Who
B: Relationship between performance & measures on established neuropsych batteries
A: Relationship between eye-tracking parameters & performance measures
M: Guess who, D-KEFs & CGT deliberation time
R: Measures correlated
D-KEFS 20 w. Guess who IAS & TQ IAS
D-KEFS colour w. guess who TQ & switching
CGT w. GW total & GW ave
Significance
Behavioural measures of guess who could be used for measure of
Categrocial processing (TQ IAS)
Cog flexibility (colour word)
Info processing (CGT)
Shorter decision time in those asking less q's & higher abstraction scores
Better categorisation & inhibitory control means more fixations
Better switching means less fixations
D-KEFs
Twenty qs
Colour-word interference
D-KEFS Colour-Word Interference
Inhibition & cog flexibility
Inhibition (r = .61, p = .05)
Better inhibitory control make more fixations
Switching (r = -.61, p = .04)
Better switching make less fixations
Guess Who TQ vs switching r = .58, p = .03
Ps asking leess Q demonstrate better switching
D-KEFS Twenty Qs
Categorise, form abstract Q, & respond to feedback
TQ IAS (r = .70, p = .02)
Better categorisation makes more fixations
Guess Who IAS & TQ-IAS r = .69, p = .01
CGT Deliberation Time
Correlate w. GW total Q (r = .57, p = .04)
Shorter decision time for those asking Qs
Correlates w. GW average AS (r = -.71, p = .003)
Shorter decision time for those w. better abstraction scores
CANTAB Cambridge Gambling Task
Decision making & risk-taking behaviour
Outcomes
Delay aversion
Deliberation time
Overall proportion bet
Quality of decision making
Risk adjustment
Risk-taking
Guess Who Behavioural Measures
M: 4 trials w. no. eliminated each round being IAS score
Total qs asked across all trials
Initial abstraction scores for all trials
Average abstraction score for all q's
Initial Abstraction Score
No. items eliminated w. first q
Take lowest of no's
Guess Who Eye-Tracking Measures
M: Time taken on trials
Total time for three questions of each trial
Average q time
No. fixation
Average no. fixations
Memory
Episodic Memory (Vo & Wolfe, 2015)
Used if other scene guidance fail
M:: Search for soap in displays w. inconsistently placed guidance
Two trials
R: Used episodic memo to speed up search
Inconsistent cause weakened semantic memo
Memory for Searched Object in Scene (Vo & Wolfe, 2015)
Search for diff objects in same scene & repeat
Search for same target second time reduce search time & search space
Diff memo representations generated by act of looking at object compared to looking for object
Free viewing of room = Intentional memorisation of whole room & relevant objects
Best memo for relevant tea-making objects
Mobile (Durant & Zanker, 2020)
A: Eye tracking strategies in real work environments
R: Eyes compensate for movement
Movement of head side to side
Movement in forward direction
Example: Everyday Life (Land, 2006)
Vision guided by desired activity
Driving car/cycling
Making tea
Cricket
Limitation
Mapping of eye movement to cog processes unclear
Need behavioural & cognitive organisation w. physiological implementation
Need combining w. well-designed experiments & other psychiological technqies to fill gaps
Galvanic Skin Response
Galvanic Skin/Skin Conductance Response
Human skin a good conductor of electricity
Changes in moisture lead to better conductance
Amplitude/latency used as quant measure w/out. requiring subjective report
Process
Two electrodes placed on skin
Tiny change passed through
Conductance measured in micro Siemens
Study: Iowa Gambling Task
GSR distinguishes conscious & unconscious processing
Test decision making under stress
M: Make bets
Small/large gains vs random high penalties
R: Develop SCRs before choosing
Loss over time = Bad decks w. high reward & large random penaly
Gain over time = Good decks w. medium reward & fewer penalties
Study: Substance & Lesions (Bechara & Damasio, 2002)
P: Lesion patients
Substance dependent individuals
vmPFC lesion patients
R: Poor performance & impaired anticipatory SCR
Explanation
Functional activation in medial frontal gyrus associated w. risk anticipation
Electromyogram
Time & intensity
Study: Functions of EMG
Motor copying in humans (Press et al., 2005)
Possibly related to mirror neuron studies
Measure reaction time & estimate force (Edgerton et al., 2001)
Significance
Show cog demands
Study: Grip (Wolpert & Flanagan, 2001)
A: Know own motor command
Predict grip kinematics & force based on perceived size/weight of object
M: Force sensors on object being gripped
R: Motor command prediction includes timing of grip
Study: Grip Aperture (Aglioti et al., 1995)
A: Interaction between visual & motor pathways
Perception & action
M: Grasp central circle object of Titchner illusion
R: Grip size same for both circles
Titchner Illusion
Perceptual illusion
Central circle same in both images
Implication
Perceptual illusion same in perception & action
Perception & action of grip more accurate than perception
Vision aware even if not consciously aware
Body Motion
Motion Capture
Image processing software
Track position of dots attached to limbs & triangulate
Study: Step Descent in Williams Syndrome (Cowie et al., 2012)
A: Measure step descent
P: Children typical & w. Williams Syndrome
M: Step height set unpredictably
R: Williams syndrome not use depth visual info to adapt step
Angles similar
Toe would move quicker & seeming w/out. control
Williams Syndrome
Genetic disorder
Impairments in visuospatial & visuomotor control
Parietal/cerebellar
Consideration
Bio differences
Relaxed ligaments
May have to co-activate more muscles in legs
Implications
Performance related to verbal age
Not poor vision/balance associated w. syndrome
Study: Bimanual Co-ordination in Unilateral Cerebral Palsy (Rudisch et al., 2016)
A: Control of limbs in affected & unaffected size
P: N = 37 children (M = 10.9 years) w. unilateral Cerebral Palsy
M: Bimanual opening box
W. affected hand
W. less affected hand
R: Temporal & spatial data related to measures of hand function & impairment
When using affected had interference (almost mirror movement) in unaffected
Subgroup w. non-symmetrical movement interference
Implications
Guide treatment
Ipsilateral connection in affected side can have poorer function than weaker contralateral connection restraining unaffected hand often not work
Study: Age Related Changes (Birtles, 1999)
A: Age related changes in movement patterns
P: Older adults vs younger adults
M: Recovery response after walk on treadmill & tripped up, muscle activation measured in EEG
R: Strategies for recovery more common in ages
Bring obstructed back foot w. more force more in younger
Put down obstructed foot & take smaller step more in older
Implications
Risk factors for falling in older adults
Benefit
Can see similar patterns in activation that are performed in diff ways
Info how people carry out movements
Bio Motion
Bio Motion
Specialised processing modules in human brain link behaviour & brain activity (Johansson, 1976; Vaina et al., 2001)
Essential ingredient of human evolutionary survival (Atkinson et al., 2004)
Study: Autistic Emotion )Hubert et al., 2007)
A: Ability to recognise person action, subjective states, emotions
P: Autistic & neurotypical
R: Autistic group no diff at labelling actions but more difficulty labelling emotion displays
Benefit
Tell about aspects of neural processing