Event Abstract

Back to Event

Predicting time is neuroanatomically distinct from estimating time

Jennifer T. Coull1*
  • 1 Aix Marseille University, Laboratoire des Neurosciences Cognitives, France

Being able to predict when relevant events are likely to occur improves speed and accuracy of information processing. Functional neuroimaging has shown that whereas spatially predictable targets activate right parietal cortex, temporally predictable targets preferentially activate left parietal cortex (Coull and Nobre, 1998). This hemispheric lateralization has subsequently been confirmed in a series of fMRI investigations, which show that using temporally informative cues to enhance motor or perceptual processing consistently activates left intraparietal sulcus (Figure 1). During motor tasks, in which endogenous temporal cues were used to speed target detection, left intraparietal sulcus activation was found to be independent of the laterality (left/right) or type (hand/eye) of motor response (Cotti et al, 2011). During perceptual tasks, in which temporal cues were used to improve discrimination accuracy, left intraparietal sulcus activation was observed whether temporal expectations were established endogenously via symbolic cues (Davranche et al, 2011) or exogenously via either the speed of a visual trajectory (Coull et al, 2008) or the rhythm of an auditory metronome (Bolger et al, in revision). However, if temporal expectations have to be updated on-line, either due to the omission of an expected target (Coull et al, 2000) or to the steadily increasing objective probability of target onset over time (the “hazard function”), activity increases preferentially in right prefrontal cortex and sensory-specific (visual) processing areas (Vallesi et al, 2008; Bueti et al, 2010). Taken together, these studies reveal distinct neural substrates for the initial use of a fixed temporal expectation (left intraparietal sulcus) versus the subsequent updating of this expectation over time (right prefrontal cortex).
In temporal expectation tasks, accurate timing is needed to facilitate the sensorimotor task goal: to process the event as quickly or accurately as possible. As such, timing is measured implicitly by the improvement in behavioural performance for the temporally predictable event. By contrast, in duration estimation tasks, in which an accurate estimate of time is itself the task goal, timing is measured explicitly either by timed motor responses or perceptual discriminations. In contrast to the left intraparietal sulcus activations consistently found for temporally predictable events, duration estimation tasks typically activate Supplementary Motor Area, right inferior frontal cortex and basal ganglia (Weiner et al, 2010; Coull et al, 2011). We recently compared explicit and implicit measures of timing directly, using temporal reproduction and temporal orienting tasks that were matched for sensorimotor requirements (Coull et al, 2013). Both tasks required the same representation of time for their successful execution, but showed distinct neural signatures: a right-lateralised fronto-striatal network when timing was measured explicitly by a temporal reproduction task but left inferior parietal cortex, left premotor cortex and cerebellum when timing was measured implicitly by a temporal orienting task. These data reflect a neuroanatomical dissociation for the timing processes that are needed to produce an overt estimate of elapsed duration (explicit measures of timing) versus those that are needed to predict the onset of a future event so as to optimize the behavioural responses to it (implicit measures of timing).

Figure 1
Image

Acknowledgements

JTC is currently funded by an Agence Nationale de la Recherche contract (ANR Blanc SHS 2-2012)

References

Bueti, D., Bahrami, B., Walsh, V., & Rees, G. (2010). Encoding of temporal probabilities in the human brain. The Journal of neuroscience, 30(12), 4343–52.

Cotti, J., Rohenkohl, G., Stokes, M., Nobre, A. C., & Coull, J. T. (2011). Functionally dissociating temporal and motor components of response preparation in left intraparietal sulcus. NeuroImage, 54(2), 1221–30.

Coull, J. T., & Nobre, A. (1998). Where and when to pay attention: the neural systems for directing attention to spatial locations and to time intervals as revealed by both PET and fMRI. The Journal of neuroscience, 18(18), 7426–35.

Coull, J. T., Frith, C. D., Büchel, C., & Nobre, a C. (2000). Orienting attention in time: behavioural and neuroanatomical distinction between exogenous and endogenous shifts. Neuropsychologia, 38(6), 808–19.

Coull, J. T., Vidal, F., Goulon, C., Nazarian, B., & Craig, C. (2008). Using time-to-contact information to assess potential collision modulates both visual and temporal prediction networks. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2, 10.

Coull, J. T., Cheng, R.-K., & Meck, W. H. (2011). Neuroanatomical and neurochemical substrates of timing. Neuropsychopharmacology, 36(1), 3–25.

Coull, J. T., Davranche, K., Nazarian, B., & Vidal, F. (2013). Functional anatomy of timing differs for production versus prediction of time intervals. Neuropsychologia, 51(2), 309–19.

Davranche, K., Nazarian, B., Vidal, F., & Coull, J. (2011). Orienting attention in time activates left intraparietal sulcus for both perceptual and motor task goals. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 23(11), 3318–30.

Wiener, M., Turkeltaub, P., & Coslett, H. B. (2010). The image of time: a voxel-wise meta-analysis. NeuroImage, 49(2), 1728–40.

Vallesi, A., McIntosh, A. R., Shallice, T., & Stuss, D. T. (2009). When time shapes behavior: fMRI evidence of brain correlates of temporal monitoring. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 21(6), 1116–26.

Keywords: temporal expectation, Temporal orienting, temporal preparation, timing, parietal, Prefrontal Cortex, Hazard function, Basal Ganglia, supplementary motor area

Conference: 14th Rhythm Production and Perception Workshop Birmingham 11th - 13th September 2013, Birmingham, United Kingdom, 11 Sep - 13 Sep, 2013.

Presentation Type: Oral Presentation

Topic: Rhythm Production and Perception

Citation: Coull JT (2013). Predicting time is neuroanatomically distinct from estimating time. Conference Abstract: 14th Rhythm Production and Perception Workshop Birmingham 11th - 13th September 2013. doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2013.214.00002

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 04 Sep 2013; Published Online: 24 Sep 2013.

* Correspondence: Dr. Jennifer T Coull, Aix Marseille University, Laboratoire des Neurosciences Cognitives, Marseille, 13331, France, jennifer.coull@univ-amu.fr