A disinhibitory circuit mechanism explains a general principle of peak performance during mid-level arousal.

Perceptual decision-making is highly dependent on the momentary arousal state of the brain, which fluctuates over time on a scale of hours, minutes, and even seconds. The textbook relationship between momentary arousal and task performance is captured by an inverted U-shape, as put forward in the Yerkes-Dodson law. This law suggests optimal performance at moderate levels of arousal and impaired performance at low or high arousal levels. However, despite its popularity, the evidence for this relationship in humans is mixed at best. Here, we use pupil-indexed arousal and performance data from various perceptual decision-making tasks to provide converging evidence for the inverted U-shaped relationship between spontaneous arousal fluctuations and performance across different decision types (discrimination, detection) and sensory modalities (visual, auditory). To further understand this relationship, we built a neurobiologically plausible mechanistic model and show that it is possible to reproduce our findings by incorporating two types of interneurons that are both modulated by an arousal signal. The model architecture produces two dynamical regimes under the influence of arousal: one regime in which performance increases with arousal and another regime in which performance decreases with arousal, together forming an inverted U-shaped arousal-performance relationship. We conclude that the inverted U-shaped arousal-performance relationship is a general and robust property of sensory processing. It might be brought about by the influence of arousal on two types of interneurons that together act as a disinhibitory pathway for the neural populations that encode the available sensory evidence used for the decision.

How (not) to demonstrate unconscious priming: Overcoming issues with post-hoc data selection, low power, and frequentist statistics.

One widely used scientific approach to studying consciousness involves contrasting conscious operations with unconscious ones. However, challenges in establishing the absence of conscious awareness have led to debates about the extent and existence of unconscious processes. We collected experimental data on unconscious semantic priming, manipulating prime presentation duration to highlight the critical role of the analysis approach in attributing priming effects to unconscious processing. We demonstrate that common practices like post-hoc data selection, low statistical power, and frequentist statistical testing can erroneously support claims of unconscious priming. Conversely, adopting best practices like direct performance-awareness contrasts, Bayesian tests, and increased statistical power can prevent such erroneous conclusions. Many past experiments, including our own, fail to meet these standards, casting doubt on previous claims about unconscious processing. Implementing these robust practices will enhance our understanding of unconscious processing and shed light on the functions and neural mechanisms of consciousness.

Pharmacological Elevation of Catecholamine Levels Improves Perceptual Decisions, But Not Metacognitive Insight.

Perceptual decisions are often accompanied by a feeling of decision confidence. Where the parietal cortex is known for its crucial role in shaping such perceptual decisions, metacognitive evaluations are thought to additionally rely on the (pre)frontal cortex. Because of this supposed neural differentiation between these processes, perceptual and metacognitive decisions may be divergently affected by changes in internal (e.g., attention, arousal) and external (e.g., task and environmental demands) factors. Although intriguing, causal evidence for this hypothesis remains scarce. Here, we investigated the causal effect of two neuromodulatory systems on behavioral and neural measures of perceptual and metacognitive decision-making. Specifically, we pharmacologically elevated levels of catecholamines (with atomoxetine) and acetylcholine (with donepezil) in healthy adult human participants performing a visual discrimination task in which we gauged decision confidence, while electroencephalography was measured. Where cholinergic effects were not robust, catecholaminergic enhancement improved perceptual sensitivity, while at the same time leaving metacognitive sensitivity unaffected. Neurally, catecholaminergic elevation did not affect sensory representations of task-relevant visual stimuli but instead enhanced well-known decision signals measured over the centroparietal cortex, reflecting the accumulation of sensory evidence over time. Crucially, catecholaminergic enhancement concurrently impoverished neural markers measured over the frontal cortex linked to the formation of metacognitive evaluations. Enhanced catecholaminergic neuromodulation thus improves perceptual but not metacognitive decision-making.