Literature DB >> 18275333

Fractionating the cognitive control required to bring about a change in task: a dense-sensor event-related potential study.

Duncan E Astle1, G M Jackson, R Swainson.   

Abstract

The ability to change our behavior is one that we frequently exert, although determining the mechanisms by which we do so is far from trivial. Task switching is a useful experimental paradigm for studying cognitive control functions. Switching between tasks is associated with a decrement in performance, or "switch-cost," relative to repeating the same task. We have previously demonstrated that this cost is dependent on switching from performing one task to performing another; changing only our intended performance does not elicit the same performance deficit. Using event-related potentials (ERPs), we dissociated two electrophysiological indices mirroring this behavioral distinction [Astle, D. E., Jackson, G. M., & Swainson, R. Dissociating neural indices of dynamic cognitive control in advance task-set preparation: An ERP study of task switching. Brain Res, 1125, 94-103, 2006]. However, what was unclear were the specific aspects of performance that were critical for triggering the neural mechanisms associated specifically with switching from a previously performed task. Two candidate aspects were: (i) that performance required a physical response and (ii) that the two tasks shared their responses (they had bivalent response mappings). The present study therefore compared three separate groups to explore the effects of these different aspects of performance. Each group completed the same basic task-switching paradigm, but with either an overt response or covert response, and either switching between tasks that shared their responses (bivalent response mappings) or had separate responses (univalent response mappings). When comparing precue-locked ERPs, we observed three separable components: one common to all three groups, one which primarily dissociated overt from covert responding, and one which primarily dissociated bivalent from univalent responding. We therefore concluded that changing our behavior engages at least three dissociable mechanisms. Interestingly, in the overt conditions, residual switch-costs were absent; in addition, therefore, we concluded that it is possible to engage cognitive control in advance, such that the new behavior is as efficient as were the subject to have repeated the old behavior.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18275333     DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  19 in total

Review 1.  The many faces of preparatory control in task switching: reviewing a decade of fMRI research.

Authors:  Hannes Ruge; Sharna Jamadar; Uta Zimmermann; Frini Karayanidis
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  A brain-potential study of preparation for and execution of a task-switch with stimuli that afford only the relevant task.

Authors:  Heike Elchlepp; Aureliu Lavric; Guy A Mizon; Stephen Monsell
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  "Smart inhibition": electrophysiological evidence for the suppression of conflict-generating task rules during task switching.

Authors:  Nachshon Meiran; Shulan Hsieh; Chi-Chih Chang
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.282

4.  At will or not at will: Electrophysiological correlates of preparation for voluntary and instructed task-switching paradigms.

Authors:  Poyu Chen; Shulan Hsieh
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-10

5.  The development of anticipatory cognitive control processes in task-switching: an ERP study in children, adolescents, and young adults.

Authors:  Alberto Manzi; Doreen Nessler; Daniela Czernochowski; David Friedman
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  Immediate versus delayed control demands elicit distinct mechanisms for instantiating proactive control.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Janowich; James F Cavanagh
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 3.282

7.  Neural correlates of task and source switching: similar or different?

Authors:  Iroise Dumontheil; Sam J Gilbert; Paul W Burgess; Leun J Otten
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2010-01-20       Impact factor: 3.251

8.  Dissociating stimulus-set and response-set in the context of task-set switching.

Authors:  Paul D Kieffaber; John K Kruschke; Raymond Y Cho; Philip M Walker; William P Hetrick
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Dissociable neural correlates of intention and action preparation in voluntary task switching.

Authors:  Edita Poljac; Nick Yeung
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2012-10-26       Impact factor: 5.357

10.  Applying an attentional set to perceived and remembered features.

Authors:  Duncan Edward Astle; Anna Christina Nobre; Gaia Scerif
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-10-29       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.