Limits...
Putting the brakes on inhibitory models of frontal lobe function.

Hampshire A - Neuroimage (2015)

Bottom Line: However, there is growing evidence to support the alternative view that response inhibition is just one prominent example of the many cognitive control processes that are supported by the same set of 'domain general' functional networks.The results demonstrate that there is no inhibitory module within the RIFC.Instead, response inhibition recruits a functionally heterogeneous ensemble of RIFC networks, which can be dissociated from each other in the context of other task demands.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: The Computational, Cognitive and Clinical Neuroimaging Laboratory, Division of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: a.hampshire@imperial.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

(a) Voxelwise whole brain analysis contrasting targets minus distractors for the four acquisition blocks with object images as stimuli rendered activation across a set of brain regions, including the anterior insular/inferior frontal operculum bilaterally and the temporal–parietal junction bilaterally. (b) Contrasting the presentation of building minus face stimuli rendered activation within the ventral visual processing streams extending close to the expected coordinates of the parahippocampal place area. The reverse contrast rendered a distributed set of brain regions, including close to the expected coordinates of the fusiform face area (all rendered with FDR correction at p < 0.05 for the whole brain mass).
© Copyright Policy - CC BY-NC-ND
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4441092&req=5

f0035: (a) Voxelwise whole brain analysis contrasting targets minus distractors for the four acquisition blocks with object images as stimuli rendered activation across a set of brain regions, including the anterior insular/inferior frontal operculum bilaterally and the temporal–parietal junction bilaterally. (b) Contrasting the presentation of building minus face stimuli rendered activation within the ventral visual processing streams extending close to the expected coordinates of the parahippocampal place area. The reverse contrast rendered a distributed set of brain regions, including close to the expected coordinates of the fusiform face area (all rendered with FDR correction at p < 0.05 for the whole brain mass).

Mentions: Supplemental voxelwise analyses rendered a broad set of frontal, parietal and sensorimotor areas for the positive effect of condition (Fig. 7a). Peak activation within the whole brain was in the right parietal cortex (PC right 54 − 38 50, t = 11.28 PC left x = − 56, y = − 38, z = 50, t = 7.29) and right temporal–parietal junction (TPJ right t x = 60, y = − 44, z = 10, t = 10.06, TPJ left x = − 56, y = − 52, z = 12, t = 5.77). Peak activation within the frontal lobes was in the right IFG pars opercularis (x = 60, y = 18, z = 8, t = 8.73). ROIs were defined at the peak PC and TPJ coordinates for further analysis. There was a significant main effect of Task within the right PC (t = 6.47, p < 0.001) but not within the right TPJ (t = 2.14, p = 0.069). These results were drive by greater activation in the PC when detecting targets with motor responses and lesser activation when simply monitoring for targets; however, there were significant responses to targets in the right PC in all six acquisition blocks (all p < 0.05).


Putting the brakes on inhibitory models of frontal lobe function.

Hampshire A - Neuroimage (2015)

(a) Voxelwise whole brain analysis contrasting targets minus distractors for the four acquisition blocks with object images as stimuli rendered activation across a set of brain regions, including the anterior insular/inferior frontal operculum bilaterally and the temporal–parietal junction bilaterally. (b) Contrasting the presentation of building minus face stimuli rendered activation within the ventral visual processing streams extending close to the expected coordinates of the parahippocampal place area. The reverse contrast rendered a distributed set of brain regions, including close to the expected coordinates of the fusiform face area (all rendered with FDR correction at p < 0.05 for the whole brain mass).
© Copyright Policy - CC BY-NC-ND
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4441092&req=5

f0035: (a) Voxelwise whole brain analysis contrasting targets minus distractors for the four acquisition blocks with object images as stimuli rendered activation across a set of brain regions, including the anterior insular/inferior frontal operculum bilaterally and the temporal–parietal junction bilaterally. (b) Contrasting the presentation of building minus face stimuli rendered activation within the ventral visual processing streams extending close to the expected coordinates of the parahippocampal place area. The reverse contrast rendered a distributed set of brain regions, including close to the expected coordinates of the fusiform face area (all rendered with FDR correction at p < 0.05 for the whole brain mass).
Mentions: Supplemental voxelwise analyses rendered a broad set of frontal, parietal and sensorimotor areas for the positive effect of condition (Fig. 7a). Peak activation within the whole brain was in the right parietal cortex (PC right 54 − 38 50, t = 11.28 PC left x = − 56, y = − 38, z = 50, t = 7.29) and right temporal–parietal junction (TPJ right t x = 60, y = − 44, z = 10, t = 10.06, TPJ left x = − 56, y = − 52, z = 12, t = 5.77). Peak activation within the frontal lobes was in the right IFG pars opercularis (x = 60, y = 18, z = 8, t = 8.73). ROIs were defined at the peak PC and TPJ coordinates for further analysis. There was a significant main effect of Task within the right PC (t = 6.47, p < 0.001) but not within the right TPJ (t = 2.14, p = 0.069). These results were drive by greater activation in the PC when detecting targets with motor responses and lesser activation when simply monitoring for targets; however, there were significant responses to targets in the right PC in all six acquisition blocks (all p < 0.05).

Bottom Line: However, there is growing evidence to support the alternative view that response inhibition is just one prominent example of the many cognitive control processes that are supported by the same set of 'domain general' functional networks.The results demonstrate that there is no inhibitory module within the RIFC.Instead, response inhibition recruits a functionally heterogeneous ensemble of RIFC networks, which can be dissociated from each other in the context of other task demands.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: The Computational, Cognitive and Clinical Neuroimaging Laboratory, Division of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: a.hampshire@imperial.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus