Limits...
Anticipatory regulation of action control in a simon task: behavioral, electrophysiological, and FMRI correlates.

Strack G, Kaufmann C, Kehrer S, Brandt S, Stürmer B - Front Psychol (2013)

Bottom Line: Cues informed either about the upcoming (1) spatial stimulus-response compatibility (rule cues), or (2) the stimulus location (position cues), or (3) were non-informative.Pre-SMA and ventrolateral prefrontal activation after rule cues correlated with the effective use of rule cues in behavioral performance.Our data point to the importance to disentangle different anticipatory adjustments that might also include the prevention of upcoming conflict via task re-coding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin, Germany.

ABSTRACT
With the present study we investigated cue-induced preparation in a Simon task and measured electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data in two within-subjects sessions. Cues informed either about the upcoming (1) spatial stimulus-response compatibility (rule cues), or (2) the stimulus location (position cues), or (3) were non-informative. Only rule cues allowed anticipating the upcoming compatibility condition. Position cues allowed anticipation of the upcoming location of the Simon stimulus but not its compatibility condition. Rule cues elicited fastest and most accurate performance for both compatible and incompatible trials. The contingent negative variation (CNV) in the event-related potential (ERP) of the cue-target interval is an index of anticipatory preparation and was magnified after rule cues. The N2 in the post-target ERP as a measure of online action control was reduced in Simon trials after rule cues. Although compatible trials were faster than incompatible trials in all cue conditions only non-informative cues revealed a compatibility effect in additional indicators of Simon task conflict like accuracy and the N2. We thus conclude that rule cues induced anticipatory re-coding of the Simon task that did not involve cognitive conflict anymore. fMRI revealed that rule cues yielded more activation of the left rostral, dorsal, and ventral prefrontal cortex as well as the pre-SMA as compared to POS and NON-cues. Pre-SMA and ventrolateral prefrontal activation after rule cues correlated with the effective use of rule cues in behavioral performance. Position cues induced a smaller CNV effect and exhibited less prefrontal and pre-SMA contributions in fMRI. Our data point to the importance to disentangle different anticipatory adjustments that might also include the prevention of upcoming conflict via task re-coding.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Conditional accuracy function (CAF) plotting behavioral accuracy as a function of response speed for rule cues (RULE), position cues (POS), and non-informative cues (NON). The slope of the fastest portion (first segment) of RTs is conceived as a measure of response capture.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3569607&req=5

Figure 3: Conditional accuracy function (CAF) plotting behavioral accuracy as a function of response speed for rule cues (RULE), position cues (POS), and non-informative cues (NON). The slope of the fastest portion (first segment) of RTs is conceived as a measure of response capture.

Mentions: Response times and accuracy data (error percentages) for all factor levels are displayed in Table 1 and Figure 2. Figure 3 shows the effect of accuracy as a function of RT dispersion.


Anticipatory regulation of action control in a simon task: behavioral, electrophysiological, and FMRI correlates.

Strack G, Kaufmann C, Kehrer S, Brandt S, Stürmer B - Front Psychol (2013)

Conditional accuracy function (CAF) plotting behavioral accuracy as a function of response speed for rule cues (RULE), position cues (POS), and non-informative cues (NON). The slope of the fastest portion (first segment) of RTs is conceived as a measure of response capture.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3569607&req=5

Figure 3: Conditional accuracy function (CAF) plotting behavioral accuracy as a function of response speed for rule cues (RULE), position cues (POS), and non-informative cues (NON). The slope of the fastest portion (first segment) of RTs is conceived as a measure of response capture.
Mentions: Response times and accuracy data (error percentages) for all factor levels are displayed in Table 1 and Figure 2. Figure 3 shows the effect of accuracy as a function of RT dispersion.

Bottom Line: Cues informed either about the upcoming (1) spatial stimulus-response compatibility (rule cues), or (2) the stimulus location (position cues), or (3) were non-informative.Pre-SMA and ventrolateral prefrontal activation after rule cues correlated with the effective use of rule cues in behavioral performance.Our data point to the importance to disentangle different anticipatory adjustments that might also include the prevention of upcoming conflict via task re-coding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin, Germany.

ABSTRACT
With the present study we investigated cue-induced preparation in a Simon task and measured electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data in two within-subjects sessions. Cues informed either about the upcoming (1) spatial stimulus-response compatibility (rule cues), or (2) the stimulus location (position cues), or (3) were non-informative. Only rule cues allowed anticipating the upcoming compatibility condition. Position cues allowed anticipation of the upcoming location of the Simon stimulus but not its compatibility condition. Rule cues elicited fastest and most accurate performance for both compatible and incompatible trials. The contingent negative variation (CNV) in the event-related potential (ERP) of the cue-target interval is an index of anticipatory preparation and was magnified after rule cues. The N2 in the post-target ERP as a measure of online action control was reduced in Simon trials after rule cues. Although compatible trials were faster than incompatible trials in all cue conditions only non-informative cues revealed a compatibility effect in additional indicators of Simon task conflict like accuracy and the N2. We thus conclude that rule cues induced anticipatory re-coding of the Simon task that did not involve cognitive conflict anymore. fMRI revealed that rule cues yielded more activation of the left rostral, dorsal, and ventral prefrontal cortex as well as the pre-SMA as compared to POS and NON-cues. Pre-SMA and ventrolateral prefrontal activation after rule cues correlated with the effective use of rule cues in behavioral performance. Position cues induced a smaller CNV effect and exhibited less prefrontal and pre-SMA contributions in fMRI. Our data point to the importance to disentangle different anticipatory adjustments that might also include the prevention of upcoming conflict via task re-coding.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus