scholarly journals Rewards Enhance Proactive and Reactive Control in Adolescence and Adulthood

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 1219-1232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucía Magis-Weinberg ◽  
Ruud Custers ◽  
Iroise Dumontheil
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Posterior Parietal Cortex ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Mixed Block ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Transient Activation ◽  
Letter Array ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
Adolescents And Adults

Abstract Cognitive control allows the coordination of cognitive processes to achieve goals. Control may be sustained in anticipation of goal-relevant cues (proactive control) or transient in response to the cues themselves (reactive control). Adolescents typically exhibit a more reactive pattern than adults in the absence of incentives. We investigated how reward modulates cognitive control engagement in a letter-array working memory (WM) task in 30 adolescents (12–17 years) and 20 adults (23–30 years) using a mixed block- and event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging design. After a Baseline run without rewards, participants performed a Reward run where 50% trials were monetarily rewarded. Accuracy and reaction time (RT) differences between Reward and Baseline runs indicated engagement of proactive control, which was associated with increased sustained activity in the bilateral anterior insula (AI), right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) and right posterior parietal cortex (PPC). RT differences between Reward and No reward trials of the Reward run suggested additional reactive engagement of cognitive control, accompanied with transient activation in bilateral AI, lateral PFC, PPC, supplementary motor area, anterior cingulate cortex, putamen and caudate. Despite behavioural and neural differences during Baseline WM task performance, adolescents and adults showed similar modulations of proactive and reactive control by reward.

scholarly journals S140. CHARACTERISTICS OF COGNITIVE CONTROL SPECIALIZATION IN HEALTHY AND PATIENT POPULATIONS

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S89-S89
Author(s):  
Anita Kwashie ◽  
Yizhou Ma ◽  
Andrew Poppe ◽  
Deanna Barch ◽  
Cameron Carter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Parietal Cortex ◽  
Posterior Parietal Cortex ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Goal Maintenance ◽  
Posterior Parietal

Abstract Background Cognitive control mechanisms enable an individual to regulate, coordinate, and sequence thoughts and actions to obtain desired outcomes. A theory of control specialization posits that proactive control is necessary for anticipatory planning and goal maintenance and recruits sustained lateral prefrontal activity, whereas reactive control, essential for adapting to transient changes, marshals a more extensive brain network (Braver, 2012). Increased task errors and reduced frontoparietal activity in proactive contexts is observed in severe psychopathology, including schizophrenia (Poppe et al., 2016), leading to the prediction that patients rely on reactive control more when performing such tasks. However, evidence of primate prefrontal ‘switch’ neurons, active during both proactive and reactive contexts, challenges the notion that cognitive control relies on discrete processing networks (Blackman et al., 2016). To examine this contradiction, we sought to characterize the distinctiveness between proactive and reactive control in healthy and patient populations using the Dot Pattern Expectancy Task (DPX). We also examined if a bias toward proactive or reactive control predicted behavioral metrics. Methods 44 individuals with schizophrenia (SZ) and 50 matched healthy controls (HC) completed 4 blocks of the DPX during a 3-Tesla fMRI scan (Poppe et al., 2016). Participants followed the ‘A-then-X’ rule, in which they pressed one button whenever an A cue followed an X probe, and pressed a different button for any other non-target stimulus sequence. We examined bilateral frontoparietal ROIs from the literature for evidence of cognitive control specialization as well as whole-brain analyses. Subsequent nonparametric tests and measures of neural response variation strengthened our interpretations. Participant d’-context (dependent on task accuracy) measured their tendency to engage in proactive control. Results Behavioral data revealed that HC participants showed a greater proclivity for proactive control than did their SZ counterparts. HC reaction time outpaced SZ reaction time in trials requiring successful marshalling of proactive control. Preliminary neuroimaging analyses suggest marginal between-group differences in control specialization. HC specialization appeared to be most apparent in diffuse frontal lateral regions, and bilateral posterior parietal cortex. Within the SZ group, specialization was most evident in bilateral posterior parietal cortex. Between-group control specialization differences were most apparent in right hemisphere frontal regions. Superior frontal gyrus and medial temporal lobe activity during proactive processes accounted for modest variance in d’-context. Discussion There were significant between-group differences in goal maintenance behavioral metrics such as reaction time and a tendency to engage in proactive control. Control specialization occurred more diffusely in controls compared to patient counterparts. However, activity in these regions had minimal ability to predict behavioral metrics. Overall, the relatively small size of control-specific areas compared to regions involved in dual processing offers support for the malleable nature of regions implicated in human cognitive control.

scholarly journals Proactive and Reactive Language Control in the Bilingual Brain

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy Seo ◽  
Chantel S. Prat
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Global Language

The current experiment investigated bilingual language control within the dual mechanisms framework. In an fMRI investigation of morphosyntactic rule production, the presence or absence of target language cues was manipulated to investigate the neural mechanisms associated with proactive and reactive global language control mechanisms. Patterns of activation across nine regions of interest (ROIs) were investigated in seventeen early Spanish–English bilingual speakers. A cue by phase interaction in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and pre-supplementary motor area (Pre-SMA) was observed, suggesting that these regions were more active during cue phases, and less active during execution phases, when target language cues were presented. Individual differences analyses showed that variability in proactive control (informative > non-informative cued trial activation during preparation) in the basal ganglia was correlated with proactive control in the left DLPFC, left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and right precentral ROIs. In contrast, reactive control (non-informative > informative cued activation during execution) in the anterior cingulate was correlated with reactive control in the Pre-SMA and left orbital frontal ROIs. The results suggest that, consistent with the dual mechanisms framework, bilinguals differ in the degree to which they use cues to proactively prepare to use a target language.

scholarly journals Developing Adaptive Control: Age-related Differences in Task Choices and Awareness of Proactive and Reactive Control Demands

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse C Niebaum ◽  
Nicolas Chevalier ◽  
Ryan Mori Guild ◽  
Yuko Munakata
Keyword(s):  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Executive Function ◽  
Task Demands ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Developmental Changes ◽  
Control Mode ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Age Related

Developmental changes in executive function are often explained in terms of core cognitive processes and associated neural substrates. For example, younger children tend to engage control reactively in the moment as needed, whereas older children increasingly engage control proactively, in anticipation of needing it. Such developments may reflect increasing capacities for active maintenance dependent upon dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. However, younger children will engage proactive control when reactive control is made more difficult, suggesting that developmental changes may also reflect decisions about whether to engage control, and how. We tested awareness of temporal control demands and associated task choices in 5- and 10-year-olds and adults using a demand selection task. Participants chose between one task that enabled proactive control and another task that enabled reactive control. Adults reported awareness of these different control demands and preferentially played the proactive task option. Ten-year-olds reported awareness of control demands but selected task options at chance. Five-year-olds showed neither awareness nor task preference, but a subsample who exhibited awareness of control demands preferentially played the reactive task option, mirroring their typical control mode. Thus, developmental improvements in executive function may in part reflect better awareness of cognitive demands and adaptive behavior, which may in turn reflect changes in dorsal anterior cingulate in signaling task demands to lateral prefrontal cortex.

scholarly journals Proactive Control of Emotional Distraction: An ERP Investigation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Laura Kranz
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Emotional Processing ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Frequency Condition ◽  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Early Posterior Negativity ◽  
Distraction Task ◽  
Emotional Distraction

<p>According to the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) framework (Braver, 2012) distraction can be controlled either proactively (i.e., before the onset of a distractor) or reactively (i.e., after the onset of a distractor). Research clearly indicates that, when distractors are emotionally neutral, proactive mechanisms are more effective at controlling distraction than reactive mechanisms. However, whether proactive control mechanisms can control irrelevant emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distraction is not known. In the current thesis I examined cognitive control over emotional distraction. In Experiment 1, I tested whether proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction as effectively as neutral distraction. Participants completed a distraction task. On each trial, they determined whether a centrally presented target letter (embedded amongst a circle of ‘o’s) was an ‘X’ or an ‘N’, while ignoring peripheral distractors (negative, neutral, or positive images). Distractors were presented on either a low proportion (25%) or a high proportion (75%) of trials, to evoke reactive and proactive cognitive control strategies, respectively. Emotional images (both positive and negative) produced more distraction than neutral images in the low distractor frequency (i.e., reactive control) condition. Critically, emotional distraction was almost abolished in the high distractor frequency condition; emotional images were only slightly more distracting than neutral images, suggesting that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction almost as effectively as neutral distraction. In Experiment 2, I replicated and extended Experiment 1. ERPs were recorded while participants completed the distraction task. An early index (the early posterior negativity; EPN) and a late index (the late positive potential; LPP) of emotional processing were examined to investigate the mechanisms by which proactive control minimises emotional distraction. The behavioural results of Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, providing further support for the hypothesis that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distractions. While proactive control was found to eliminate early emotional processing of positive distractors, it paradoxically did not attenuate late emotional processing of positive distractors. On the other hand, proactive control eliminated late emotional processing of negative distractors. However, the early index of emotional processing was not a reliable index of negative distractor processing under either reactive or proactive conditions. Taken together, my findings show that proactive mechanisms can effectively control emotional distraction, but do not clearly establish the mechanisms by which this occurs.</p>

scholarly journals Metacognitive Processes in Executive Control Development: The Case of Reactive and Proactive Control

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1125-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Chevalier ◽  
Shaina Bailey Martis ◽  
Tim Curran ◽  
Yuko Munakata
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Target Onset ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Critical Aspect ◽  
Metacognitive Processes

Young children engage cognitive control reactively in response to events, rather than proactively preparing for events. Such limitations in executive control have been explained in terms of fundamental constraints on children's cognitive capacities. Alternatively, young children might be capable of proactive control but differ from older children in their metacognitive decisions regarding when to engage proactive control. We examined these possibilities in three conditions of a task-switching paradigm, varying in whether task cues were available before or after target onset. RTs, ERPs, and pupil dilation showed that 5-year-olds did engage in advance preparation, a critical aspect of proactive control, but only when reactive control was made more difficult, whereas 10-year-olds engaged in proactive control whenever possible. These findings highlight metacognitive processes in children's cognitive control, an understudied aspect of executive control development.

scholarly journals Cognitive Control in Young and Older Adults: Does Mood Matter?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 50
Author(s):  
Linda Truong ◽  
Kesaan Kandasamy ◽  
Lixia Yang
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Mood Induction ◽  
Control Mode ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Control Framework ◽  
Neutral Mood

The dual mechanisms of control framework (DMC) proposes two modes of cognitive control: proactive and reactive control. In anticipation of an interference event, young adults primarily use a more proactive control mode, whereas older adults tend to use a more reactive one during the event, due to age-related deficits in working memory. The current study aimed to examine the effects of mood induction on cognitive control mode in older (ages 65+) compared to young adults (ages 18–30) with a standard letter-cue (Experiment 1) and a modified face-cue AX-CPT (Experiment 2). Mood induction into negative and/or positive mood versus neutral mood was conducted prior to the cognitive control task. Experiment 1 replicated the typical pattern of proactive control use in young adults and reactive control use in older adults. In Experiment 2, older adults showed comparable proactive control to young adults in their response time (RT). Mood induction showed little effect on cognitive control across the two experiments. These results did not reveal consistent effects of mood (negative or positive) on cognitive control mode in young and older adults, but discovered (or demonstrated) that older adults can engage proactive control when dichotomous face cues (female or male) are used in AX-CPT.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document