Literature DB >> 28017818

Neural cascade of conflict processing: Not just time-on-task.

Cameron C McKay1, Berry van den Berg2, Marty G Woldorff3.   

Abstract

In visual conflict tasks (e.g., Stroop or flanker), response times (RTs) are generally longer on incongruent trials relative to congruent ones. Two event-related-potential (ERP) components classically associated with the processing of stimulus conflict are the fronto-central, incongruency-related negativity (Ninc) and the posterior late-positive complex (LPC), which are derived from the ERP difference waves for incongruent minus congruent trials. It has been questioned, however, whether these effects, or other neural measures of incongruency (e.g., fMRI responses in the anterior cingulate), reflect true conflict processing, or whether such effects derive mainly from differential time-on-task. To address this question, we leveraged high-temporal-resolution ERP measures of brain activity during two behavioral tasks. The first task, a modified Erikson flanker paradigm (with congruent and incongruent trials), was used to evoke the classic RT and ERP effects associated with conflict. The second was a non-conflict control task in which, participants visually discriminated a single stimulus (with easy and hard discrimination conditions). Behaviorally, the parameters were titrated to yield similar RT effects of conflict and difficulty (27ms). Neurally, both within-task contrasts showed an initial fronto-central negative-polarity wave (N2-latency effect), but they then diverged. In the difficulty difference wave, the initial negativity led directly into the posterior LPC, whereas in the incongruency contrast the initial negativity was followed a by a second fronto-central negative peak (Ninc), which was then followed by a considerably longer-latency LPC. These results provide clear evidence that the longer processing for incongruent stimulus inputs do not just reflect time-on-task or difficulty, but include a true conflict-processing component.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive control; Conflict processing; EEG; Task difficulty; Time-on-task

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28017818      PMCID: PMC5365079          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.12.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  49 in total

1.  Asymmetries in a unilateral flanker task depend on the direction of the response: the role of attentional shift and perceptual grouping.

Authors:  J Diedrichsen; R B Ivry; A Cohen; S Danziger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  An ERP study of the temporal course of the Stroop color-word interference effect.

Authors:  M Liotti; M G Woldorff; R Perez; H S Mayberg
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.139

3.  Strategic control and medial frontal negativity: beyond errors and response conflict.

Authors:  Bruce D Bartholow; Melanie A Pearson; Cheryl L Dickter; Kenneth J Sher; Monica Fabiani; Gabriele Gratton
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 4.016

4.  An ERP investigation of the Stroop task: the role of the cingulate in attentional allocation and conflict resolution.

Authors:  Gjurgjica Badzakova-Trajkov; Kylie J Barnett; Karen E Waldie; Ian J Kirk
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.252

5.  N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control.

Authors:  B Kopp; F Rist; U Mattler
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  The involvement of the dopaminergic midbrain and cortico-striatal-thalamic circuits in the integration of reward prospect and attentional task demands.

Authors:  Ruth M Krebs; Carsten N Boehler; Kenneth C Roberts; Allen W Song; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 5.357

7.  The relationship between cognitive performance and electrophysiological indices of performance monitoring.

Authors:  Michael J Larson; Peter E Clayson
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Priming and backward influences in the human brain: processing interactions during the stroop interference effect.

Authors:  L G Appelbaum; K L Meyerhoff; M G Woldorff
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  The neural dynamics of stimulus and response conflict processing as a function of response complexity and task demands.

Authors:  Sarah E Donohue; Lawrence G Appelbaum; Cameron C McKay; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 3.139

10.  FieldTrip: Open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data.

Authors:  Robert Oostenveld; Pascal Fries; Eric Maris; Jan-Mathijs Schoffelen
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2010-12-23
View more
  5 in total

1.  Preserved sensory processing but hampered conflict detection when stimulus input is task-irrelevant.

Authors:  Tristan Bekinschtein; Simon van Gaal; Stijn Adriaan Nuiten; Andrés Canales-Johnson; Lola Beerendonk; Nutsa Nanuashvili; Johannes Jacobus Fahrenfort
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 8.140

2.  Neural Processing of Cognitive Control in an Emotionally Neutral Context in Anxiety Patients.

Authors:  Nicola König; Sarah Steber; Anna Borowski; Harald R Bliem; Sonja Rossi
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-04-26

3.  A fine-grained time course investigation of brain dynamics during conflict monitoring.

Authors:  Paolo Ruggeri; Hadj Boumediene Meziane; Thomas Koenig; Catherine Brandner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  EEG theta and N400 responses to congruent versus incongruent brand logos.

Authors:  Hossein Dini; Aline Simonetti; Enrique Bigne; Luis Emilio Bruni
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Enhancing allocation of visual attention with emotional cues presented in two sensory modalities.

Authors:  Ulrike Zimmer; Mike Wendt; Marlene Pacharra
Journal:  Behav Brain Funct       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 3.950

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.