Reinforcement learning of irrelevant stimulus-response associations modulates cognitive control.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinglu Chen ◽  
Ling Tan ◽  
Lu Liu ◽  
Ling Wang
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Learning ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Irrelevant Stimulus ◽  
Stimulus Response

scholarly journals Relationship Between Language Dominance and Stimulus-Stimulus or Stimulus-Response Inhibition in Uyghur-Chinese Bilinguals with an Investigation of Speed-Accuracy Trade-Offs

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wu ◽  
Struys ◽  
Lochtman
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Language Dominance ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Monitoring Process ◽  
Response Task ◽  
Speed Accuracy

The effect of bilingualism on inhibition control is increasingly under ongoing exploration. The present study primarily investigated the effect of within bilingual factors (i.e., dominance types of Uyghur-Chinese bilinguals) on a Stimulus-Stimulus task (Flanker) and a Stimulus-Response task (Simon). We also compared the bilinguals' performance on each type of cognitive control task in respect to a possible trade-off between speed and accuracy. The findings showed no explicit differences on performance in response time or accuracy among balanced, L1-dominant and L2-dominant bilinguals but balanced bilinguals demonstrated a significant speed-accuracy trade-off in the overall context switching between non-conflict and conflict trials in both cognitive control tasks where monitoring process is highly demanded. Additionally, all bilinguals across all language dominance types showed a trade-off strategy in inhibition during a Stimulus-Stimulus conflict (flanker task). This evidence indicates that the differences of within bilinguals in cognitive control could lie in the monitoring process, while for all bilinguals, inhibition during a Stimulus-Stimulus conflict could be a major component in the mechanism of bilingual language processing.

scholarly journals Posterior Alpha and Gamma Oscillations Index Divergent and Superadditive Effects of Cognitive Interference

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 1931-1945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex I Wiesman ◽  
Tony W Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Dynamics ◽  
Irrelevant Stimulus ◽  
Spatial Location ◽  
Cognitive Conflict ◽  
Gamma Oscillations ◽  
Relevant Stimulus ◽  
Cognitive Interference ◽  
Motor Mapping ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Gamma Frequency

Abstract Conflicts at various stages of cognition can cause interference effects on behavior. Two well-studied forms of cognitive interference are stimulus–stimulus (e.g., Flanker), where the conflict arises from incongruence between the task-relevant stimulus and simultaneously presented irrelevant stimulus information, and stimulus-response (e.g., Simon), where interference is the result of an incompatibility between the spatial location of the task-relevant stimulus and a prepotent motor mapping of the expected response. Despite substantial interest in the neural and behavioral underpinnings of cognitive interference, it remains uncertain how differing sources of cognitive conflict might interact, and the spectrally specific neural dynamics that index this phenomenon are poorly understood. Herein, we used an adapted version of the multisource interference task and magnetoencephalography to investigate the spectral, temporal, and spatial dynamics of conflict processing in healthy adults (N = 23). We found a double-dissociation such that, in isolation, stimulus–stimulus interference was indexed by alpha (8–14 Hz), but not gamma-frequency (64–76 Hz) oscillations in the lateral occipital regions, while stimulus–response interference was indexed by gamma oscillations in nearby cortices, but not by alpha oscillations. Surprisingly, we also observed a superadditive effect of simultaneously presented interference types (multisource) on task performance and gamma oscillations in superior parietal cortex.

Reduced Cognitive Control Demands after Practice of Saccade Tasks in a Trial Type Probability Manipulation

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 368-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan E. Pierce ◽  
Jennifer E. McDowell
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Parietal Cortex ◽  
Trial Type ◽  
Posterior Parietal Cortex ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Mirror Image ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Practice Group ◽  
Task Practice ◽  
Posterior Parietal

Cognitive control is engaged to facilitate stimulus–response mappings for novel, complex tasks and supervise performance in unfamiliar, challenging contexts—processes supported by pFC, ACC, and posterior parietal cortex. With repeated task practice, however, the appropriate task set can be selected in a more automatic fashion with less need for top–down cognitive control and weaker activation in these brain regions. One model system for investigating cognitive control is the ocular motor circuitry underlying saccade production, with basic prosaccade trials (look toward a stimulus) and complex antisaccade trials (look to the mirror image location) representing low and high levels of cognitive control, respectively. Previous studies have shown behavioral improvements on saccade tasks after practice with contradictory results regarding the direction of functional MRI BOLD signal change. The current study presented healthy young adults with prosaccade and antisaccade trials in five mixed blocks with varying probability of each trial type (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100% anti vs. pro) at baseline and posttest MRI sessions. Between the scans, participants practiced either the specific probability blocks used during testing or only a general 100% antisaccade block. Results indicated an overall reduction in BOLD activation within pFC, ACC, and posterior parietal cortex and across saccade circuitry for antisaccade trials. The specific practice group showed additional regions including ACC, insula, and thalamus with an activation decrease after practice, whereas the general practice group showed a little change from baseline in those clusters. These findings demonstrate that cognitive control regions recruited to support novel task behaviors were engaged less after practice, especially with exposure to mixed task contexts rather than a novel task in isolation.

Representing Response Position Relative to Display Location: Influence on Orthogonal Stimulus–Response Compatibility

2005 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 839-864 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Seok Cho ◽  
Robert W. Proctor
Keyword(s):  
Irrelevant Stimulus ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
The Body ◽  
Response Compatibility ◽  
Response Position ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Stimulus Set ◽  
Response Sets ◽  
Stimulus Response Compatibility ◽  
Display Location

Two types of stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) effect occur with orthogonal stimulus and response sets, an overall up–right/down–left advantage and mapping preferences that vary with response position. Researchers agree that the former type is due to asymmetric coding of the stimulus and response alternatives, but disagree as to whether the latter type requires a different explanation in terms of the properties of the motor system. This issue is examined in three experiments. The location of the stimulus set influenced orthogonal SRC when it varied along the same dimension as the responses (Experiments 1 and 2), with the pattern predicted by the hypothesis that the stimulus set provides a referent relative to which response position is coded. The effect of stimulus-set location on orthogonal SRC was independent of the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) for a marker that indicated stimulus-set side and the imperative stimulus. In contrast, a spatial correspondence effect for the irrelevant stimulus-set location and response was a decreasing function of SOA. Experiment 3 showed that the orthogonal SRC effect was determined by response position relative to the stimulus-set location and not the body midline. The results support the view that both types of orthogonal SRC effects are due to asymmetric coding of the stimuli and responses.

scholarly journals Emotional state dependence facilitates automatic imitation of visual speech

2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (12) ◽  
pp. 2833-2847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasmine Virhia ◽  
Sonja A Kotz ◽  
Patti Adank
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Emotional State ◽  
Response Times ◽  
State Dependence ◽  
Emotional Valence ◽  
Visual Speech ◽  
Automatic Imitation ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
State Dependent

Observing someone speak automatically triggers cognitive and neural mechanisms required to produce speech, a phenomenon known as automatic imitation. Automatic imitation of speech can be measured using the Stimulus Response Compatibility (SRC) paradigm that shows facilitated response times (RTs) when responding to a prompt (e.g., say aa) in the presence of a congruent distracter (a video of someone saying aa), compared with responding in the presence of an incongruent distracter (a video of someone saying oo). Current models of the relation between emotion and cognitive control suggest that automatic imitation can be modulated by varying the stimulus-driven task aspects, that is, the distracter’s emotional valence. It is unclear how the emotional state of the observer affects automatic imitation. The current study explored independent effects of emotional valence of the distracter (Stimulus-driven Dependence) and the observer’s emotional state (State Dependence) on automatic imitation of speech. Participants completed an SRC paradigm for visual speech stimuli. They produced a prompt superimposed over a neutral or emotional (happy or angry) distracter video. State Dependence was manipulated by asking participants to speak the prompt in a neutral or emotional (happy or angry) voice. Automatic imitation was facilitated for emotional prompts, but not for emotional distracters, thus implying a facilitating effect of State Dependence. The results are interpreted in the context of theories of automatic imitation and cognitive control, and we suggest that models of automatic imitation are to be modified to accommodate for state-dependent and stimulus-driven dependent effects.

scholarly journals Cognitive control in bilinguals: Advantages in Stimulus–Stimulus inhibition

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 610-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
HENRIKE K. BLUMENFELD ◽  
VIORICA MARIAN
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Stroop Task ◽  
Simon Task ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Stimulus Features ◽  
Task Irrelevant ◽  
Language Profiles

Bilinguals have been shown to outperform monolinguals at suppressing task-irrelevant information and on overall speed during cognitive control tasks. Here, monolinguals’ and bilinguals’ performance was compared on two nonlinguistic tasks: a Stroop task (with perceptualStimulus–Stimulus conflictamong stimulus features) and a Simon task (withStimulus–Response conflict). Across two experiments testing bilinguals with different language profiles, bilinguals showed more efficient Stroop than Simon performance, relative to monolinguals, who showed fewer differences across the two tasks. Findings suggest that bilingualism may engage Stroop-type cognitive control mechanisms more than Simon-type mechanisms, likely due to increased Stimulus–Stimulus conflict during bilingual language processing. Findings are discussed in light of previous research on bilingual Stroop and Simon performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document