Abstract
Models in general, and computational neural models in particular, are useful to the extent they fulfill three aims, which roughly constitute a life cycle of a model. First, at birth, models must account for existing phenomena, and with mechanisms that are no more complicated than necessary. Second, at maturity, models must make strong, falsifiable predictions that can guide future experiments. Third, all models are by definition incomplete, simplified representations of the mechanisms in question, so they should provide a basis of inspiration to guide the next generation of model development, as new data challenge and force the field to move beyond the existing models. Thus the final part of the model life cycle is a dialectic of model properties and empirical challenge. In this phase, new experimental data test and refine the model, leading either to a revised model or perhaps the birth of a new model. In what follows, we provide an outline of how this life cycle has played out in a particular series of models of the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Kuhn TS (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Poldrack RA (2008) The role of fMRI in cognitive neuroscience: where do we stand? Curr Opin Neurobiol 18(2):223–7
Poldrack RA (2012) The future of fMRI in cognitive neuroscience. Neuroimage 62(2):1216–20
Gage GJ, Parikh H, Marzullo TC (2008) The cingulate cortex does everything. Ann Improbable Res 14(3):12–15
Falkenstein M et al (1991) Effects of crossmodal divided attention on late ERP components: II. Error processing in choice reaction tasks. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 78:447–455
Gehring WJ et al (1990) The error-related negativity: an event-related potential accompanying errors. Psychophysiology 27:34
Botvinick M et al (1999) Conflict monitoring versus selection-for-action in anterior cingulate cortex. Nature 402(6758):179–181
Botvinick MM et al (2001) Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol Rev 108:624–652
Shidara M, Richmond BJ (2002) Anterior cingulate: single neuronal signals related to degree of reward expectancy. Science 296(5573):1709–11
Shima K, Tanji J (1998) Role of cingulate motor area cells in voluntary movement selection based on reward. Science 282:1335–1338
Chandrasekhar PVS et al (2008) Neurobiological regret and rejoice functions for aversive outcomes. Neuroimage 39(3):1472–84
Rainville P (1997) Pain affect encoded in human anterior cingulate but not somatosensory cortex. Science 277(5328):968–971
Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD, Williams KD (2003) Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. Science 302(5643):290–2
Posner MI, Petersen SE, Fox PT, Raichle ME (1988) Localization of cognitive operations in the human brain. Science 240(4859):1627–1631
Rudebeck PH et al (2008) Frontal cortex subregions play distinct roles in choices between actions and stimuli. J Neurosci 28(51):13775–85
Walton ME, Devlin JT, Rushworth MFS (2004) Interactions between decision making and performance monitoring within prefrontal cortex. Nat Neurosci 7(11):1259–1266
Stroop JR (1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol 18(6):643–662
Brown JW, Braver TS (2005) Learned predictions of error likelihood in the anterior cingulate cortex. Science 307(5712):1118–1121
Holroyd CB, Coles MG (2002) The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. Psych Rev 109(4):679–709
Brown JW (2009) Multiple cognitive control effects of error likelihood and conflict. Psychol Res 73(6):744–50
Nieuwenhuis S et al (2007) Error-likelihood prediction in the medial frontal cortex: a critical evaluation. Cereb Cortex 17:1570–1581
Brown JW, Braver TS (2007) Risk prediction and aversion by anterior cingulate cortex. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 7(4):266–77
Brown JW, Braver TS (2008) A computational model of risk, conflict, and individual difference effects in the anterior cingulate cortex. Brain Res 1202:99–108
Holroyd CB, Krigolson OE (2007) Reward prediction error signals associated with a modified time estimation task. Psychophysiology 44(6):913–7
Ferdinand NK et al (2012) The processing of unexpected positive response outcomes in the mediofrontal cortex. J Neurosci 32(35):12087–92
Jessup RK, Busemeyer JR, Brown JW (2010) Error effects in anterior cingulate cortex reverse when error likelihood is high. J Neurosci 30(9):3467–3472
Oliveira FT, McDonald JJ, Goodman D (2007) Performance monitoring in the anterior cingulate is not all error related: expectancy deviation and the representation of action-outcome associations. J Cogn Neurosci 19(12):1994–2004
Grinband J et al (2011) The dorsal medial frontal cortex is sensitive to time on task, not response conflict or error likelihood. Neuroimage 57(2):303–311
Yeung N, Nieuwenhuis S (2009) Dissociating response conflict and error likelihood in anterior cingulate cortex. J Neurosci 29(46):14506–14510
Forster SE, Brown JW (2011) Medial prefrontal cortex predicts and evaluates the timing of action outcomes. Neuroimage 55(1):253–65
Ito S et al (2003) Performance monitoring by anterior cingulate cortex during saccade countermanding. Science 302:120–122
Kennerley SW et al (2006) Optimal decision making and the anterior cingulate cortex. Nat Neurosci 9(7):940–947
Hayden BY, Pearson JM, Platt ML (2011) Neuronal basis of sequential foraging decisions in a patchy environment. Nat Neurosci 14(7):933–9
Amador N, Schlag-Rey M, Schlag J (2000) Reward-predicting and reward-detecting neuronal activity in the primate supplementary eye field. J Neurophysiol 84(4):2166–70
Matsumoto M et al (2007) Medial prefrontal cell activity signaling prediction errors of action values. Nat Neurosci 10(5):647–656
Cole MW et al (2009) Cingulate cortex: diverging data from humans and monkeys. Trends Neurosci 32(11):566–74
Ford KA et al (2009) BOLD fMRI activation for anti-saccades in nonhuman primates. Neuroimage 45(2):470–6
Chamberlin TC (1965) The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science 148(3671):754–759
Platt JR (1964) Strong inference: certain systematic methods of scientific thinking may produce much more rapid progress than others. Science 146(3642):347–353
Amiez C, Joseph J-P, Procyk E (2005) Anterior cingulate error-related activity is modulated by predicted reward. European J Neurosci 21(12):3447–52
Scheffers MK, Coles MG (2000) Performance monitoring in a confusing world: error-related brain activity, judgments of response accuracy, and types of errors. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26(1):141–51
Steinhauser M, Maier M, Hübner R (2008) Modeling behavioral measures of error detection in choice tasks: response monitoring versus conflict monitoring. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 34(1):158–76
Yeung N, Cohen JD, Botvinick MM (2004) The neural basis of error detection: conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. Psychol Rev 111(4):931–59
Holroyd CB et al (2005) A mechanism for error detection in speeded response time tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 134(2):163–191
Alexander WH, Brown JW (2010) Computational models of performance monitoring and cognitive control. Top Cogn Sci 2:658–677
Alexander WH, Brown JW (2011) Medial prefrontal cortex as an action-outcome predictor. Nat Neurosci 14(10):1338–1344
Goldstein RZ et al (2009) Anterior cingulate cortex hypoactivations to an emotionally salient task in cocaine addiction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106(23):9453–8
Jahn A, Nee DE, Brown JW (2011) The neural basis of predicting the outcomes of imagined actions. Front Neurosci 5:128–128
Hillman KL, Bilkey DK (2012) Neural encoding of competitive effort in the anterior cingulate cortex. Nat Neurosci 15(9):1290–7
Suzuki S et al (2012) Learning to simulate others’ decisions. Neuron 74(6):1125–37
Wessel JR et al (2012) Surprise and error: common neuronal architecture for the processing of errors and novelty. J Neurosci 32(22):7528–37
Glascher J et al (2010) States versus rewards: dissociable neural prediction error signals underlying model-based and model-free reinforcement learning. Neuron 66(4):585–595
Acknowledgments
Supported by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) through Department of the Interior (DOI) contract D10PC20023. The US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright annotation thereon. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of IARPA, DOI or the US Government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Alexander, W., Brown, J. (2015). Reciprocal Interactions of Computational Modeling and Empirical Investigation. In: Forstmann, B., Wagenmakers, EJ. (eds) An Introduction to Model-Based Cognitive Neuroscience. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2236-9_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2236-9_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2235-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2236-9
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)