Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Big Brain Thinking

Continued from page 1

By Emily Singer

Monday, February 13, 2006

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

TR: Most of your experiments have been done on monkeys. How did that begin to shape your view on the relationship between brain functions and human consciousness?

BN: We study motion perception. We train monkeys to look at a pattern of dots moving in a certain direction and to report the direction of the dots by moving their eyes in the same direction. If a monkey picks the correct answer, he gets a reward.

This simple behavior contains a world in terms of understanding how the nervous system performs intelligent behavior. Sensory information that comes into the brain through the eye must be coded into some neural language that represents the stimulus within the brain. Based on this neural representation, the monkey must then make a high-level judgment about what he is actually seeing. This "decision" in turn guides the selection of a motor response, to look to the left or the right.

TR: And you added a new level to this experimental setup by stimulating the monkey's brain.

BN: We put an electrode in an area of the brain known as MT. The cells in this area respond selectively to a specific direction of motion. Some cells are active when the monkey looks at dots moving to the left, some cells are active when the monkey looks at dots moving to the right. People had suspected for a long time that MT was important for our ability to see motion. So we did an experiment where we stimulated these cells artificially with tiny pulses of electrical current -- it changed what the monkeys reported seeing.

TR: So with the monkey experiments, you can stimulate the brain in very focused ways and change the way the monkey responds. But the monkey can't tell you what he sees when you stimulate the brain.

BN: Yes. People can report what they see or hear or feel, but with monkeys, you can only look at their change in behavior. I can't climb into a monkey's head and see what the monkey really sees.

This gets to core of the current debate about the study of consciousness. What is the conscious experience that accompanies the stimulation and the monkey's decision? Even if you knew everything about how the neurons encode and transmit information, you may not know what the monkey experiences when we stimulate his MT.

TR: People have shown that stimulating the human brain can do similar things too, right?

BN: Electrical stimulation of the brain is not new. Wilder Penfield, a neurosurgeon in Canada in 1930s and 40s, who pioneered the neurosurgical treatment of epilepsy, was the first to start stimulating the brains of conscious humans. He wanted to be able to identify the parts of the brain involved in speech and movement, before he took out the piece of brain he thought was responsible for disease, so he developed ways to make a hole in the skull and expose the brain in fully conscious humans.

While he was in there stimulating the brain for clinical purposes, he also stimulated other parts of brain. He showed that by stimulating visual cortex, you can get people to see stars or flashes of light. When he stimulated the auditory cortex, people could hear buzzing signals. When he went deeper into the brain, into the temporal cortex, he could elicit complex perceptions. A patient would say things like, 'I'm sitting on the back porch of my mother's house and she's calling me to dinner.'

He did all of this in the 1930s, but the field never went anywhere because he knew nothing about the circuitry of the brain. Penfield was just stimulating neural tissue of an unknown nature. He could elicit conscious phenomena, but he gained no insight into how, exactly, the conscious phenomena are related to the [behavior] of the activated neurons.

Now we know about single cells, neural circuits, and their selective properties. So we can make better hypotheses about how cells might contribute to cognitive phenomena such as perception or memory or attention. We can tweak carefully targeted parts of the system and get a predictable response.

Comments

  • Emergency
    Try this: consciousness does not emerge from brain activity; brain activity emerges from consciousness.  An experiment such as the one described will likely produce ambiguous results, or will confirm the null hypothesis, depending on the bias of the experimenter/subject.  Separating the experimenter from the subject has its value, which should be more than enough reason to not do as described, quite apart from the risk of brain damage.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Bruce Cox)
    02/13/2006
    Posts:1
    • Big Brain Thinking
      Can't trans cranial magnetic stimulation induce current in specific neurons?
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Hal Seyle)
      02/14/2006
      Posts:1
      • TMS is not specific enough
        TMS is not very localized, e.g. you can induce large temporary lesions
        in visual cortex but not more.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (A)
        02/15/2006
        Posts:1
    • Big Brain Thinking
      I think that consciousness emerges from brain activity AND brain activity arises from consciousness.

      I would love to be part of this research. I am very involved in learning about the brain since my TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) in 1973. I've come back further than just about anyone I've known with TBI (and as a Case Manager for a TBI research project and now as a vocational rehabilitation counselor who presently works with several people with TBI, I've met hundreds)
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (John Hatten)
      02/14/2006
      Posts:1
    • overlay and filter
      I do agree that physical brain activity is directed by our consciousness, but it is also quite true that physical conditions, let alone stimulus, can have quite an effect on consciousness.  What will be the true scientific problem is how to rigorously formulate experiments and extract data.  Time to get creative!
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (travis mattera)
      02/15/2006
      Posts:1
      • Consciousness before brain activity?
        How could this be?
        We can easily show that brain activity effects consciousness, but not the other way around.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Mike)
        02/15/2006
        Posts:1
        • A thought
          Not that I know anything about a human MT beyond what is said in the interview, but suppose his realization that and experience of his MT being stimulated causes his MT to explode.

          Brain activity being altered will have had an effect on coinscious activity, which subsequently had an adverse effect on brain activity. (which would then no doubt cause a serious counscious/personality shift and Bill Newsome would embark on a career change and become an artist.)
          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (MrMosis)
          02/15/2006
          Posts:1
        • Consciousness?
          Consciousness?  These people talk about it like it was some scientific fact.  What is consciousness??  How can you be searching for something when you don't know what "it" even is?  Decisions?  Who says we make decisions?  From instinct (emotion), you want to do one thing more than the other.  So, decisions and consciousness is simply the brain's ability to say "food is more important than being comfy", etc.  Why are people trying to overcomplicate things?  There is no ghost in the machine.
          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (Ben Shumway)
          02/15/2006
          Posts:1
          • Could be.
            You can't rule it out either.
            Rate this comment: 12345
            Guest (/e)
            02/15/2006
            Posts:1
            • can't rule out
              You can't rule it outtttttttt.
              http://maair.net
              http://mannan.zabvision.edu.pk
              Rate this comment: 12345
              Guest (Mannan)
              02/16/2006
              Posts:1
          • Outside our realm
            The problem with studying consciousness, is that it is our own consciousness that tries to study it. Now try to grab your right arm with your right arm.
            Rate this comment: 12345
            Guest (Gard)
            02/15/2006
            Posts:1
            • The simplest plausible solution
              Aren't we looking for the level of abstraction from stimulus to activity to consciousness? I don't believe they are separable but this kind of research may determine boundaries and even lead to breakthroughs in priorities. For example, the heartbeat is more important than breathing, breathing is more important than stopping bleeding and so on. It may be that shocking a brain will kill a person but a carefully applied stimulus may cause critical activity which could lead to the resumption of conscious thought. At least, that is how it would work in science fiction and is what shock paddles do with the heart.
              Rate this comment: 12345
              Guest (Derlin)
              02/16/2006
              Posts:1
          • consciousness
            conscsiosness is awareness of our own thought ,ablity ,behaviour .
            Rate this comment: 12345
            Guest (eranimos)
            05/02/2006
            Posts:1
            • [no subject]
              Also your bearings/whereabouts
              Rate this comment: 12345
              Guest
              07/10/2006
              Posts:1
        • Why Not - Encouraged to read on Kant
          How does an artist or philosopher creates art or notions completely original. We need to visit Kant and Clausewitz on coup de oeil or intution. A simple article is at chap 3 of the following link
          http://www.maxwell.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/SAAS_Theses/SAASS_Out/Pellegrini/pellegrini.pdf

          Cheers


          Rate this comment: 12345
          Guest (Gurbachan Singh)
          04/26/2006
          Posts:1
  • The stimulis is simply artificial data in
    By stimulating the MT he is only inputing false data to be interpreted by the consciousness. And to begin with he doesn't even know what data he inputs until his consciousness responds to it.

    I fail to see what he can learn beyond the effects of normal sensory input, except that he has fooled his consciousness with false data.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Sandi)
    02/20/2006
    Posts:1
    • Not just simulated stimulus
      The part of this that could shed some light on consciousness is the fact that it is not just simulating stimulus.  By bypassing certain parts of the normal flow of optical information you can start to see what parts of the brain contribute to conscious thought as opposed to unconcscious calculations.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      Guest (Evan)
      02/21/2006
      Posts:1
      • interpreting false data is the whole point
        We can speculate that the  stimulation of the monkey MT does things to the monkey because of the monkeys response. 

        you can stimulate a monkey all day long, but at the end of the day the monkey's response is still just oooohhh aahha ahhh oohh.

        This guy will be able to describe the experience (assuming he doesn't accidentally damage his brain too much) of having his MT? stimulated.

        He knows the data is false, but will be able to still experience the sensation of the stimulation and describe with great detail what occurred.

        I think the fooling of the consciousness with false data is the whole point
        Rate this comment: 12345
        Guest (Nate)
        04/13/2006
        Posts:1
  • math
    hi fatty
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (chydgv)
    03/08/2006
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Laser-Triggered Chemical Reactions
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.