Dynamic Modulation of the Processing of Unpredicted Technical Errors by the Posterior Cingulate and the Default Mode Network

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2024 Jun 12

PMID 38867061

Authors

Zhiyan Wang

Markus Becker

Gregor Kondla

Henner Gimpel

Anton L Beer

Mark W Greenlee

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The pervasive use of information technologies (IT) has tremendously benefited our daily lives. However, unpredicted technical breakdowns and errors can lead to the experience of stress, which has been termed technostress. It remains poorly understood how people dynamically respond to unpredicted system runtime errors occurring while interacting with the IT systems on a behavioral and neuronal level. To elucidate the mechanisms underlying such processes, we conducted a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in which 15 young adults solved arithmetic problems of three difficulty levels (easy, medium and hard) while two types of system runtime errors (problem errors and feedback errors) occurred in an unexpected manner. The problem error condition consisted of apparently defective displays of the arithmetic problem and the feedback error condition involved erroneous feedback. We found that the problem errors positively influenced participants' problem-solving performance at the high difficulty level (i.e., hard tasks) at the initial stage of the session, while feedback errors disturbed their performance. These dynamic behavioral changes are mainly associated with brain activation changes in the posterior cingulate and the default mode network, including the posterior cingulate cortex, the mPFC, the retrosplenial cortex and the parahippocampal gyrus. Our study illustrates the regulatory role of the posterior cingulate in coping with unpredicted errors as well as with dynamic changes in the environment.

References

Pearson J, Hayden B, Raghavachari S, Platt M . Neurons in posterior cingulate cortex signal exploratory decisions in a dynamic multioption choice task. Curr Biol. 2009; 19(18):1532-7. PMC: 3515083. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.048. View

Arnetz B, Wiholm C . Technological stress: psychophysiological symptoms in modern offices. J Psychosom Res. 1997; 43(1):35-42. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3999(97)00083-4. View

Henze G, Konzok J, Kreuzpointner L, Bartl C, Peter H, Giglberger M . Increasing Deactivation of Limbic Structures Over Psychosocial Stress Exposure Time. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2020; 5(7):697-704. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.04.002. View

Smith V, Mitchell D, Duncan J . Role of the Default Mode Network in Cognitive Transitions. Cereb Cortex. 2018; 28(10):3685-3696. PMC: 6132281. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhy167. View

Pearson J, Heilbronner S, Barack D, Hayden B, Platt M . Posterior cingulate cortex: adapting behavior to a changing world. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011; 15(4):143-51. PMC: 3070780. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.02.002. View

Albert K, Pruessner J, Newhouse P . Estradiol levels modulate brain activity and negative responses to psychosocial stress across the menstrual cycle. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015; 59:14-24. PMC: 4492530. DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.04.022. View

Seth A, Barrett A, Barnett L . Granger causality analysis in neuroscience and neuroimaging. J Neurosci. 2015; 35(8):3293-7. PMC: 4339347. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4399-14.2015. View

Menon V . 20 years of the default mode network: A review and synthesis. Neuron. 2023; 111(16):2469-2487. PMC: 10524518. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2023.04.023. View

Smith V, Duncan J, Mitchell D . Roles of the Default Mode and Multiple-Demand Networks in Naturalistic versus Symbolic Decisions. J Neurosci. 2021; 41(10):2214-2228. PMC: 8018769. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1888-20.2020. View

10.

Fischl B, van der Kouwe A, Destrieux C, Halgren E, Segonne F, Salat D . Automatically parcellating the human cerebral cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2003; 14(1):11-22. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhg087. View

11.

Wheelock M, Harnett N, Wood K, Orem T, Granger D, Mrug S . Prefrontal Cortex Activity Is Associated with Biobehavioral Components of the Stress Response. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016; 10:583. PMC: 5112266. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00583. View

12.

Liu J, Zhang H, Chen C, Chen H, Cui J, Zhou X . The neural circuits for arithmetic principles. Neuroimage. 2016; 147:432-446. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.12.035. View

13.

Pruessner J, Dedovic K, Khalili-Mahani N, Engert V, Pruessner M, Buss C . Deactivation of the limbic system during acute psychosocial stress: evidence from positron emission tomography and functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. Biol Psychiatry. 2007; 63(2):234-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.04.041. View

14.

Beer A, Watanabe T, Ni R, Sasaki Y, Andersen G . 3D surface perception from motion involves a temporal-parietal network. Eur J Neurosci. 2009; 30(4):703-13. PMC: 2902171. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06857.x. View

15.

Glasser M, Coalson T, Robinson E, Hacker C, Harwell J, Yacoub E . A multi-modal parcellation of human cerebral cortex. Nature. 2016; 536(7615):171-178. PMC: 4990127. DOI: 10.1038/nature18933. View

16.

Hermans E, Henckens M, Joels M, Fernandez G . Dynamic adaptation of large-scale brain networks in response to acute stressors. Trends Neurosci. 2014; 37(6):304-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2014.03.006. View

17.

McGuire J, Nassar M, Gold J, Kable J . Functionally dissociable influences on learning rate in a dynamic environment. Neuron. 2014; 84(4):870-81. PMC: 4437663. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.10.013. View

18.

Barnett L, Seth A . The MVGC multivariate Granger causality toolbox: a new approach to Granger-causal inference. J Neurosci Methods. 2013; 223:50-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.018. View

19.

van Oort J, Tendolkar I, Hermans E, Mulders P, Beckmann C, Schene A . How the brain connects in response to acute stress: A review at the human brain systems level. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017; 83:281-297. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.10.015. View

20.

Destrieux C, Fischl B, Dale A, Halgren E . Automatic parcellation of human cortical gyri and sulci using standard anatomical nomenclature. Neuroimage. 2010; 53(1):1-15. PMC: 2937159. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.010. View