9 Search , Goals , and the Brain
Catharine A. Winstanley,Trevor W. Robbins,Bernard W. Balleine,Joshua W. Brown,Christian Büchel,Roshan Cools,Daniel Durstewitz,John P. O’Doherty,Cyriel M. A. Pennartz,A. David Redish,Jeremy K. Seamans
2012-01-01
Abstract:The process of cognitive search invokes a purposeful and iterative process by which an organism considers information of a potentially diverse nature and selects a particular option that best matches the appropriate criteria. This chapter focuses on the neurobiological basis of such a goal-directed search by parsing the process into its main components, suggested here as initiation, identifi cation of search space, deliberation, action selection, and evaluation and search termination. Unexpected uncertainty is suggested as a key trigger for the onset of the search process. Current data posit that this is represented in the anterior cingulate, parietal, and inferior frontal cortices, suggesting these areas could be particularly important in search initiation. A change in motivational state, likely signaled by a wide range of brain regions including the amygdala, can also play a role at this stage. The neural structures which represent the set of to-be-searched options may vary depending on the search domain (e.g., spatial, visual, linguistic). During deliberation, predictions regarding the consequences of selecting these options are generated and compared, implicating areas of frontal cortex as well as the hippocampus and striatum, which are known to play a role in different aspects of outcome evaluation. Action planning and selection likely involve an interplay between the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia, whereas search termination could involve the specifi c neural networks implicated in response inhibition. The infl uence exerted over the search process by the major ascending neuromodulators (dopamine, norepinephrine/ noradrenaline, serotonin, and acetylcholine) is also considered, and a particularly critical role suggested for dopamine and noradrenaline, given their ability to infl uence cognitive fl exibility and arousal. Finally, pathologies of search processes are discussed, both with respect to brain damage and psychiatric illness. Introduction and Overview Search is defi ned as “movement in pursuit of a resource at an unknown location” (Hills and Dukas, this volume). This very general defi nition allows From “Cognitive Search: Evolution, Algorithms, and the Brain,” edited by Peter M. Todd, Thomas T. Hills, and Trevor W. Robbins. 2012. Strüngmann Forum Report, vol. 9, J. Lupp, series ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-01809-8. 126 C. A. Winstanley et al. search to be applied quite broadly from protozoa to humans. While laudable, this breadth could also motivate comparisons in process that are less desirable. The focus on superfi cial aspects of search, particularly the movements that collectively defi ne the search response, provides a ready means of identifying search. However, it also implies that identity in response means identity in mechanism, and this may be problematic. It is tempting to argue that the occurrence of an organized set of responses associated with exploration (such as orienting, locomoting, pausing, turning, returning, and so on) always refl ects a deliberated, goal-directed search process under cognitive control, whether nascent or explicit. Nevertheless, care should be taken with such assumptions. Considerable research has established that seemingly indistinguishable behavioral responses can, at different times and under different constraints, be controlled by quite distinct determinants. Take the case of lever pressing in rats as an example (see O’Doherty and Balleine, this volume). The behavior in which rats press a lever for food appears to be a quintessential goal-directed response mediated by both its relation to a goal (the specifi c food) and by the value of that goal; a movement in pursuit of a resource certainly qualifi es as a search response. However, it is now well known that when the action is overtrained or goal access is placed under certain temporal constraints, the determinants of this response can change: it is no longer a fl exible, deliberate goal-directed action; it becomes more routine, automatic, infl exible or habitual. Although it would still satisfy the broad behavioral defi nition of a search, such an automated process entails a refl exive movement elicited by antecedent stimuli, rather than its consequences. Hence, if we believe search to be essentially a goal-directed behavior, most exploratory behavior only looks like a search response; it utilizes different brain structures and depends on different computations within the mammalian brain. This leads us to reject it as a true cognitive search response. As a consequence, it is necessary in all situations to establish whether a putative search response satisfi es two conditions: 1. The performance of the search response is determined by the organism as being causal with respect to some specifi c resource or goal. 2. Its performance is sensitive to changes in the value of the goal. There are, in fact, at least three kinds of search response which, by this defi nition, do not qualify as cognitive search. These responses refl ect the operation of three different motivational constraints and can be referred to as “evaluative processes,” “ Pavlovian processes,” and “habitual processes.” Note fi rst that sensory processing is common to each and is assumed to be more or less constant across all forms of search or search-like responses. In a novel or changing environment, sampling the sensory environment is critical, and search in this domain is likely to be general, constrained by a bottom-up attentional process sensitive to physical salience, regulated by motivational arousal, and subject to simple learning processes such as habituation. From “Cognitive Search: Evolution, Algorithms, and the Brain,” edited by Peter M. Todd, Thomas T. Hills, and Trevor W. Robbins. 2012. Strüngmann Forum Report, vol. 9, J. Lupp, series ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-01809-8. Search, Goals, and the Brain 127 Evaluative Processes The fi rst motivational constraint on search is the learning process by which stimuli become associated with specifi c, innate motivational processes, thereby conferring value on sensory events (e.g., contact with stimuli that provoke nutrient activity produces an association between those stimuli and the nutrient system resulting in what might be called the “representation of a specifi c food”). Increases in nutrient deprivation have long been reported to elicit an immediate increase in activity and orienting; food deprivation, for example, increases orienting to foods, as well as an increase in the production of vacuous consummatory/defensive reactions appropriate to those processes (e.g., food events will provoke consummatory responses—salivation, chewing, gastric motility, etc.). Thus although these appear to refl ect search, they are actually refl exes elicited by internal states and not by their relationship to a specifi c resource (Changizi and Hall 2001).