Biology subjects

Padmala, S.

Publications and source records attributed to Padmala, S..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2020

To pool or not to pool: Can we ignore cross-trial variability in FMRI?

In this work, we investigate the importance of explicitly accounting for cross-trial variability in neuroimaging data analysis. To attempt to obtain reliable estimates in a task-based experiment, each condition is usually repeated across many trials. The investigator may be interested in (a) condition-level effects, (b) trial-level effects, or (c) the association of trial-level effects with the corresponding behavior data. The typical strategy for condition-level modeling is to create one regressor per condition at the subject level with the underlying assumption that responses do not change across trials. In this methodology of complete pooling, all cross-trial variability is ignored and dismissed as random noise that is swept under the rug of model residuals. Unfortunately, this framework invalidates the generalizability from the confine of specific trials (e.g., particular faces) to the associated stimulus category ("face"), and may inflate the statistical evidence when the trial sample size is not large enough. Here we propose an adaptive and computationally tractable framework that meshes well with the current two-level pipeline and explicitly accounts for trial-by-trial variability. The trial-level effects are first estimated per subject through no pooling. To allow generalizing beyond the particular stimulus set employed, the cross-trial variability is modeled at the population level through partial pooling in a multilevel model, which permits accurate effect estimation and characterization. Alternatively, trial-level estimates can be used to investigate, for example, brain-behavior associations or correlations between brain regions. Furthermore, our approach allows appropriate accounting for serial correlation, handling outliers, adapting to data skew, and capturing nonlinear brain-behavior relationships. By applying a Bayesian multilevel model framework at the level of regions of interest to an experimental dataset, we show how multiple testing can be addressed and full results reported without arbitrary dichotomization. Our approach revealed important differences compared to the conventional method at the condition level, including how the latter can distort effect magnitude and precision. Notably, in some cases our approach led to increased statistical sensitivity. In summary, our proposed framework provides an effective strategy to capture trial-by-trial responses that should be of interest to a wide community of experimentalists.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2019

Interactions between emotion and action in the brain

A growing literature supports the existence of interactions between emotion and action in the brain, and the central participation of the anterior midcingulate cortex (aMCC) in this regard. In the present functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we sought to investigate the role of self-relevance during such interactions by varying the context in which threating pictures were presented (with guns pointed towards or away from the observer). Participants performed a simple visual detection task following exposure to such stimuli. Except for voxelwise tests, we adopted a Bayesian analysis framework which evaluated evidence for the hypotheses of interest, given the data, in a continuous fashion. Behaviorally, our results demonstrated a valence by context interaction such that there was a tendency of speeding up responses to targets after viewing threat pictures directed towards the participant. In the brain, interaction patterns that paralleled those observed behaviorally were observed most notably in the middle temporal gyrus, supplementary motor area, precentral gyrus, and anterior insula. In these regions, activity was overall greater during threat conditions relative to neutral ones, and this effect was enhanced in the directed towards context. A valence by context interaction was observed in the aMCC too, where we also observed a correlation (across participants) of evoked responses and reaction time data. Taken together, our study revealed the context-sensitive engagement of motor-related areas during emotional perception, thus supporting the idea that emotion and action interact in important ways in the brain.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2017

Tracking dynamic threat imminence

During real-life situations, multiple factors interact dynamically to determine threat level. In the current functional MRI study involving healthy adult human volunteers, we investigated interactions between proximity, direction (approach vs. retreat), and speed during a dynamic threat-of-shock paradigm. As a measure of threat-evoked physiological arousal, skin conductance responses were recorded during fMRI scanning. Whereas some brain regions tracked individual threat-related factors, others were also sensitive to combinations of these variables. In particular, signals in the anterior insula tracked the interaction between proximity and direction where approach vs. retreat responses were stronger when threat was closer compared to farther. A parallel proximity-by-direction interaction was also observed in physiological skin conductance responses. In the right amygdala, we observed a proximity by direction interaction, but intriguingly in the opposite direction as the anterior insula; retreat vs. approach responses were stronger when threat was closer compared to farther. In the right bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, we observed an effect of threat proximity, whereas in the right periaqueductal gray/midbrain we observed an effect of threat direction and a proximity by direction by speed interaction (the latter was detected in exploratory analyses but not in a voxelwise fashion). Together, our study refines our understanding of the brain mechanisms involved during aversive anticipation in the human brain. Importantly, it emphasizes that threat processing should be understood in a manner that is both context sensitive and dynamic.

neuroscience↗