scholarly journals Altered proactive control in adults with ADHD: Evidence from event-related potentials during cued task switching

2020 ◽  
Vol 138 ◽  
pp. 107330
Author(s):  
Justina Sidlauskaite ◽  
Monica Dhar ◽  
Edmund Sonuga-Barke ◽  
Jan R. Wiersema
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Related Potentials

Fractionating the Cognitive Control Required to Bring About a Change in Task: A Dense-sensor Event-related Potential Study

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duncan E. Astle ◽  
G. M. Jackson ◽  
R. Swainson
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Overt Response ◽  
Control Functions ◽  
Basic Task ◽  
Physical Response ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
Covert Response

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.

scholarly journals Cognitive caching promotes flexibility in task switching: evidence from event-related potentials

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Lange ◽  
Caroline Seer ◽  
Dorothea Müller ◽  
Bruno Kopp
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Related Potentials

Components of Attentional Set-switching

2005 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. F. S. Rushworth ◽  
R. E. Passingham ◽  
A. C. Nobre
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Stimulus Dimension ◽  
Task Switch ◽  
Attentional Set ◽  
Set Switching ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
The Way

Abstract. A series of distinct event-related potentials (ERPs) have been recorded from the scalp of human subjects as they switch from one task to another. It is possible that task switching may depend on different mechanisms depending on whether the switch requires a change in attentional set, in other words the redirecting of attention to different aspects of a sensory stimulus, or whether it requires a change in intentional set, in others words a change in the way that responses are selected. To address this issue, the current study recorded ERPs while subjects switched between attentional sets and the results were compared with those of a previous investigation in which subjects switched between intentional sets. Subjects selected stimuli according to two conflicting attentional sets, each emphasizing one visual stimulus dimension (colour, shape). Pairs of stimuli, only one of which was to be attended, were presented for between eight and seventeen trials then either a switch or a stay cue was shown. The switch cue instructed subjects to switch from the current attentional set to the other set, while the stay cue instructed subjects to maintain the current set. Comparing ERPs time-locked to the switch and stay cues revealed neural correlates of the initiation of a task switch. Comparing the ERPs time locked to the first stimuli after either stay or switch cues identified neural correlates of the implementation of a task switch. A similar modulation over parietal electrodes was seen when subjects were switching between either attentional or intentional sets. While an intentional set switch began with a medial frontal modulation, attentional set switching began with a lateral frontal modulation. Implementing a new attentional set was associated with modulation of relatively early visual potentials, while implementing a new intentional set was associated with modulation of later response-related potentials. The results confirm that task switching consists of a number of constituent processes which may be taxed to different degrees depending on whether a task-switch paradigm requires subjects to change the way in which they select stimuli or responses.

scholarly journals Task Switching and Novelty Processing Activate a Common Neural Network for Cognitive Control

2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 1734-1748 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Barcelo ◽  
Carles Escera ◽  
Maria J. Corral ◽  
Jose A. Periáñez
Keyword(s):  
Neural Network ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Response Selection ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Task Switch ◽  
Task Condition ◽  
Novelty P3 ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
And Task

The abrupt onset of a novel event captures attention away from, and disrupts, ongoing task performance. Less obvious is that intentional task switching compares with novelty-induced behavioral distraction. Here we explore the hypothesis that intentional task switching and attentional capture by a novel distracter both activate a common neural network involved in processing contextual novelty [Barcelo, F., Periáñez, J. A., & Knight, R. T. Think differently: A brain orienting response to task novelty. NeuroReport, 13, 1887–1892, 2002.]. Event-related potentials were recorded in two task-cueing paradigms while 16 subjects sorted cards following either two (color or shape; two-task condition) or three (color, shape, or number; three-task condition) rules of action. Each card was preceded by a familiar tone cueing the subject either to switch or to repeat the previous rule. Novel sound distracters were interspersed in one of two blocks of trials in each condition. Both novel sounds and task-switch cues impaired responses to the following visual target. Novel sounds elicited novelty P3 potentials with their usual peak latency and frontal-central scalp distribution. Familiar tonal switch cues in the three- and two-task conditions elicited brain potentials with a similar latency and morphology as the novelty P3, but with relatively smaller amplitudes over frontal scalp regions. Covariance and principal component analyses revealed a sustained frontal negative potential that was distorting concurrent novelty P3 activity to the tonal switch cues. When this frontal negativity was statistically removed, P3 potentials to novel sounds and task-switch cues showed similar scalp topographies. The degree of activation in the novelty P3 network seemed to be a function of the information (entropy) conveyed by the eliciting stimulus for response selection, over and above its relative novelty, probability of occurrence, task relevance, or feedback value. We conclude that novelty P3 reflects transient activation in a neural network involved in updating task set information for goal-directed action selection and might thus constitute one key element in a central bottleneck for attentional control.

scholarly journals Priming of object categorization within and across levels of specificity

Psihologija ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasna Martinovic ◽  
Thomas Gruber ◽  
Matthias Müller
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Time Window ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Naming Task ◽  
Object Identification ◽  
Early Event ◽  
Repetition Effects ◽  
Lower Accuracy ◽  
Related Potentials

Identification of objects can occur at different levels of specificity. Depending on task and context, an object can be classified at the superordinate level (as an animal), at the basic level (a bird) or at the subordinate level (a sparrow). What are the interactions between these representational levels and do they rely on the same sequential processes that lead to successful object identification? In this electroencephalogram study, a task-switching paradigm (covert naming or living/non-living judgment) was used. Images of objects were repeated either within the same task, or with a switch from a covert naming task to a living or non-living judgment and vice versa. While covert naming accesses entrylevel (basic or subordinate), living/non-living judgments rely on superordinate classification. Our behavioral results demonstrated clear priming effects within both tasks. However, asymmetries were found when task-switching had occurred, with facilitation for covert naming but not for categorization. We also found lower accuracy and early-starting and persistent enhancements of event-related potentials (ERPs) for covert naming, indicating that this task was more difficult and involved more intense perceptual and semantic processing. Perceptual priming was marked by consistent reductions of the ERP component L1 for repeated presentations, both with and without task switching. Additional repetition effects were found in early event-related activity between 150-190 ms (N1) when a repeated image had been named at initial presentation. We conclude that differences in N1 indicate task-related changes in the identification process itself. Such enhancements for covert naming again emerge in a later time window associated with depth of semantic processing. Meanwhile, L1 reflects modulations due to implicit memory of objects. In conclusion, evidence was found for representational overlap; changes in ERP markers started early and revealed cross-task priming at the level of object structure analysis and more intense perceptual and semantic processing for covert naming.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document