| Literature DB >> 22815825 |
Nicolas Poirel1, Grégoire Borst, Grégory Simon, Sandrine Rossi, Mathieu Cassotti, Arlette Pineau, Olivier Houdé.
Abstract
Although young children can accurately determine that two rows contain the same number of coins when they are placed in a one-to-one correspondence, children younger than 7 years of age erroneously think that the longer row contains more coins when the coins in one of the rows are spread apart. To demonstrate that prefrontal inhibitory control is necessary to succeed at this task (Piaget's conservation-of-number task), we studied the relationship between the percentage of BOLD signal changes in the brain areas activated in this developmental task and behavioral performance on a Stroop task and a Backward Digit Span task. The level of activation in the right insula/inferior frontal gyrus was selectively related to inhibitory control efficiency (i.e., the Stroop task), whereas the activation in the left intraparietal sulcus (IPS) was selectively related to the ability to manipulate numerical information in working memory (i.e., the Backward Digit Span task). Taken together, the results indicate that to acquire number conservation, children's brains must not only activate the reversibility of cognitive operations (supported by the IPS) but also inhibit a misleading length-equal-number strategy (supported by the right insula/inferior frontal gyrus).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22815825 PMCID: PMC3397932 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040802
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Example of conservation-of-number trial and percentages of explained variance between percentage of fMRI signal change during the conservation task and behavioral scores for the successful and the control groups of children.
Lower scores for the Stroop task reflect higher inhibitory control efficiency.
MNI coordinates and number of voxels of brain regions more activated in children who succeeded to the length-interference items than in children who were not able to efficiently perform the Piagetian task.
| Brain regions of interest | Number of voxels | MNI coordinates | ||
| X | Y | Z | ||
| R Calcarine | 6556 | 30 | −56 | 50 |
| R Temporal poles of the superior and inferior temporal gyri | 58 | 48 | 22 | −36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| L Precentral gyrus | 109 | −48 | −8 | 58 |
| L/R Middle frontal gyrus | 681 | 50 | 22 | 38 |
| 95 | −36 | 34 | 40 | |
| R Middle frontal gyrus, orbital part | 103 | 42 | 46 | −14 |
| 158 | 44 | 58 | 0 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 59 | −32 | 20 | −14 | |
Note: L = Left; R = Right.
This network represents the brain regions necessary to surpass the length-numerosity interference.
F Ratio and p values of the parameter estimates in the regression analysis between the activity of brain regions necessary to surpass the length-numerosity interference and behavioral tests for children who succeeded to the length-interference items (successful group) and for children who were not able to efficiently perform the Piagetian task (control group).
| Brain regions of interest | Behavioral results of the successful group | Behavioral results ofthe control group | ||||||
| Stroop | BackwardDigit Span | Stroop | BackwardDigit Span | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| R Calcarine | 1.60 | .23 | 3.29 | .10 | 4.80 | .06 | 2.29 | .17 |
| R Temporal poles of the superior and inferiortemporal gyri | 1.29 | .28 | 0.03 | .87 | 0.43 | .53 | 0.04 | .85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| L Precentral gyrus | 2.14 | .17 | 0.69 | .42 | 0.28 | .61 | 0.08 | .78 |
| L/R Middle frontal gyrus | 1.34 | .27 | 0.53 | .48 | 0.08 | .78 | 0.10 | .76 |
| 0.92 | .36 | 0.10 | .76 | 0.04 | .84 | 2.05 | .19 | |
| R Middle frontal gyrus, orbital part | 0.99 | .34 | 0.06 | .81 | 0.03 | .86 | 0.24 | .64 |
| 0.26 | .62 | 0.70 | .42 | 1.16 | .31 | 0.07 | .79 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1.37 | .27 | 2.12 | .17 | 0.07 | .79 | 0.72 | .42 | |
Note: L = Left; R = Right.
Note that age and gender were included as covariates in the analyses. *p<0.05.