scholarly journals Prefrontal Cortical Mechanisms Underlying Individual Differences in Cognitive Flexibility and Stability

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 2385-2399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana J. N. Armbruster ◽  
Kai Ueltzhöffer ◽  
Ulrike Basten ◽  
Christian J. Fiebach
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Functional Coupling ◽  
Switching Rate ◽  
Distractor Inhibition ◽  
Cognitive Stability ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Inferior Frontal Junction

The pFC is critical for cognitive flexibility (i.e., our ability to flexibly adjust behavior to changing environmental demands), but also for cognitive stability (i.e., our ability to follow behavioral plans in the face of distraction). Behavioral research suggests that individuals differ in their cognitive flexibility and stability, and neurocomputational theories of working memory relate this variability to the concept of attractor stability in recurrently connected neural networks. We introduce a novel task paradigm to simultaneously assess flexible switching between task rules (cognitive flexibility) and task performance in the presence of irrelevant distractors (cognitive stability) and to furthermore assess the individual “spontaneous switching rate” in response to ambiguous stimuli to quantify the individual dispositional cognitive flexibility in a theoretically motivated way (i.e., as a proxy for attractor stability). Using fMRI in healthy human participants, a common network consisting of parietal and frontal areas was found for task switching and distractor inhibition. More flexible persons showed reduced activation and reduced functional coupling in frontal areas, including the inferior frontal junction, during task switching. Most importantly, the individual spontaneous switching rate antagonistically affected the functional coupling between inferior frontal junction and the superior frontal gyrus during task switching and distractor inhibition, respectively, indicating that individual differences in cognitive flexibility and stability are indeed related to a common prefrontal neural mechanism. We suggest that the concept of attractor stability of prefrontal working memory networks is a meaningful model for individual differences in cognitive stability versus flexibility.

scholarly journals How Sequentially Changing Reward Prospect Modulates Meta-control: Increasing Reward Prospect Promotes Cognitive Flexibility

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Fröber ◽  
Gesine Dreisbach
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Control Signal ◽  
The Other ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Cognitive Stability ◽  
High Reward ◽  
Nonsignificant Difference ◽  
Switch Rate

Abstract Meta-control is necessary to regulate the balance between cognitive stability and flexibility. Evidence from (voluntary) task switching studies suggests performance-contingent reward as one modulating factor. Depending on the immediate reward history, reward prospect seems to promote either cognitive stability or flexibility: Increasing reward prospect reduced switch costs and increased the voluntary switch rate, suggesting increased cognitive flexibility. In contrast, remaining high reward prospect increased switch costs and reduced the voluntary switch rate, suggesting increased cognitive stability. Recently we suggested that increasing reward prospect serves as a meta-control signal toward cognitive flexibility by lowering the updating threshold in working memory. However, in task switching paradigms with two tasks only, this could alternatively be explained by facilitated switching to the other of two tasks. To address this issue, a series of task switching experiments with uncued task switching between three univalent tasks was conducted. Results showed a reduction in reaction time (RT) switch costs to a nonsignificant difference and a high voluntary switch rate when reward prospect increased, whereas repetition RTs were faster, switch RTs slower, and voluntary switch rate was reduced when reward prospect remained high. That is, increasing reward prospect put participants in a state of equal readiness to respond to any target stimulus—be it a task repetition or a switch to one of the other two tasks. The study thus provides further evidence for the assumption that increasing reward prospect serves as a meta-control signal to increase cognitive flexibility, presumably by lowering the updating threshold in working memory.

scholarly journals The Neurocognitive Cost of Enhancing Cognition with Methylphenidate: Improved Distractor Resistance but Impaired Updating

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 652-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean James Fallon ◽  
Marieke E. van der Schaaf ◽  
Niels ter Huurne ◽  
Roshan Cools
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Neural Signal ◽  
Specific Effects ◽  
Cognitive Stability ◽  
Paradoxical Effects ◽  
Memory Representations ◽  
The Stability ◽  
And Task

A balance has to be struck between supporting distractor-resistant representations in working memory and allowing those representations to be updated. Catecholamine, particularly dopamine, transmission has been proposed to modulate the balance between the stability and flexibility of working memory representations. However, it is unclear whether drugs that increase catecholamine transmission, such as methylphenidate, optimize this balance in a task-dependent manner or bias the system toward stability at the expense of flexibility (or vice versa). Here we demonstrate, using pharmacological fMRI, that methylphenidate improves the ability to resist distraction (cognitive stability) but impairs the ability to flexibly update items currently held in working memory (cognitive flexibility). These behavioral effects were accompanied by task-general effects in the striatum and opposite and task-specific effects on neural signal in the pFC. This suggests that methylphenidate exerts its cognitive enhancing and impairing effects through acting on the pFC, an effect likely associated with methylphenidate's action on the striatum. These findings highlight that methylphenidate acts as a double-edged sword, improving one cognitive function at the expense of another, while also elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying these paradoxical effects.

Individual differences in resilience to stress are associated with affective flexibility

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Rademacher ◽  
Dominik Kraft ◽  
Cindy Eckart ◽  
Christian Fiebach
Keyword(s):  
Response Time ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Affective Valence ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Cognitive Stability ◽  
Situational Demands ◽  
Affective Information ◽  
Relationship Of

Cognitive flexibility, the capacity to adjust behavior to changing situational demands, is frequently linked to resilience because of its important contribution to stress regulation. In this context, particularly affective flexibility, defined as the ability to flexibly attend and disengage from affective information, may play a significant role. However, there are so far only very few empirical investigations that directly explore the link between flexibility and resilience to stress. In the present study, the relationship of cognitive and affective flexibility and resilience was examined in 100 healthy participants. Resilience was measured with three self-report questionnaires, two defining resilience as a personality trait and one focusing on resilience as an outcome in the sense of stress coping abilities. Cognitive and affective flexibility were assessed in two experimental task switching paradigms with non-affective and affective materials and tasks, respectively. The cognitive flexibility paradigm additionally included measures of cognitive stability and dispositional cognitive flexibility. In the affective flexibility paradigm, we explicitly considered the affective valence of the stimuli before and during task switching. Response time switch costs in the affective flexibility paradigm were significantly correlated to all three self-report measures of resilience. Regarding the valence of the stimuli, the correlation with resilience was not specific to costs when switching from negative to positive information or vice versa. For cognitive (i.e., non-affective) flexibility, a significant correlation of response time switch costs was found with only one of the three resilience measures. A regression analysis including both affective and cognitive switch costs as predictors of resilience indicated that only affective, but not cognitive switch costs, explained unique variance components. Furthermore, the experimental measures of cognitive stability and dispositional cognitive flexibility did not correlate with resilience scores. These findings suggest that specifically the efficiency of flexibly switching between affective and non-affective information is related to resilience.

scholarly journals Reward Acts on the pFC to Enhance Distractor Resistance of Working Memory Representations

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 2812-2826 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean James Fallon ◽  
Roshan Cools
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Ventral Striatum ◽  
Reward Processing ◽  
Functional Coupling ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Cognitive Stability ◽  
Memory Representations ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Differential Coupling ◽  
Dependent Interaction

Working memory and reward processing are often thought to be separate, unrelated processes. However, most daily activities involve integrating these two types of information, and the two processes rarely, if ever, occur in isolation. Here, we show that working memory and reward interact in a task-dependent manner and that this task-dependent interaction involves modulation of the pFC by the ventral striatum. Specifically, BOLD signal during gains relative to losses in the ventral striatum and pFC was associated not only with enhanced distractor resistance but also with impairment in the ability to update working memory representations. Furthermore, the effect of reward on working memory was accompanied by differential coupling between the ventral striatum and ignore-related regions in the pFC. Together, these data demonstrate that reward-related signals modulate the balance between cognitive stability and cognitive flexibility by altering functional coupling between the ventral striatum and the pFC.

scholarly journals Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Executive Dysfunctions in ADHD: Implications for Inhibitory Control, Interference Control, Working Memory, and Cognitive Flexibility

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (13) ◽  
pp. 1928-1943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vahid Nejati ◽  
Mohammad Ali Salehinejad ◽  
Michael A. Nitsche ◽  
Asal Najian ◽  
Amir-Homayoun Javadi
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Cognitive Flexibility ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Sham Stimulation ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Left Dlpfc

Objective: This study examined effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) on major executive functions (EFs), including response inhibition, executive control, working memory (WM), and cognitive flexibility/task switching in ADHD. Method: ADHD children received (a) left anodal/right cathodal DLPFC tDCS and (b) sham stimulation in Experiment 1 and (a) left anodal DLPFC/right cathodal OFC tDCS, (b) left cathodal DLPFC/right anodal OFC tDCS, and (c) sham stimulation in Experiment 2. The current intensity was 1 mA for 15 min with a 72-hr interval between sessions. Participants underwent Go/No-Go task, N-back test, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), and Stroop task after each tDCS condition. Results: Anodal left DLPFC tDCS most clearly affected executive control functions (e.g., WM, interference inhibition), while cathodal left DLPFC tDCS improved inhibitory control. Cognitive flexibility/task switching benefited from combined DLPFC-OFC, but not DLPFC stimulation alone. Conclusion: Task-specific stimulation protocols can improve EFs in ADHD.

scholarly journals Working Memory Capacity Predicts Individual Differences in Social Distancing Compliance during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weizhen Xie ◽  
Stephen Campbell ◽  
Weiwei Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Unique Contribution ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
The Individual

Noncompliance with social distancing during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic poses a great challenge to the public health system. These noncompliance behaviors partly reflect people’s concerns for the inherent costs of social distancing while discounting its public health benefits. We propose that this oversight may be associated with the limitation in one’s mental capacity to simultaneously retain multiple pieces of information in working memory (WM) for rational decision making that leads to social distancing compliance. We tested this hypothesis in 850 U.S. residents during the first 2 weeks following the presidential declaration of national emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that participants’ social distancing compliance at this initial stage could be predicted by individual differences in WM capacity, partly due to increased awareness of benefits over costs of social distancing among higher WM capacity individuals. Critically, the unique contribution of WM capacity to the individual differences in social distancing compliance could not be explained by other psychological and socioeconomic factors (e.g., moods, personality, education, and income levels). Furthermore, the critical role of WM capacity in social distancing compliance can be generalized to the compliance with another set of rules for social interactions, namely the fairness norm, in Western cultures. Collectively, our data reveal novel contributions of a core cognitive process underlying social distancing compliance during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting a potential cognitive venue for developing strategies to mitigate a public health crisis.

scholarly journals White Matter Brain Structure Predicts Language Performance and Learning Success

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stella M. Sanchez ◽  
Helmut Schmidt ◽  
Guillermo Gallardo ◽  
Alfred Anwander ◽  
Jens Brauer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
White Matter ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Brain Structure ◽  
Network Motif ◽  
Language Performance ◽  
Neural Basis ◽  
Complex Sentences ◽  
The Individual

Individual differences in the ability to deal with language have long been discussed. The neural basis of these, however, is yet unknown. Here we investigated the relationship between long-range white matter connectivity of the brain, as revealed by diffusion tractography, and the ability to process syntactically complex sentences in the participants' native language as well as the improvement thereof by multi-day training. We identified specific network motifs that indeed related white matter tractography to individual language processing performance. First, for two such motifs, one in the left and one in the right hemisphere, their individual prevalence significantly predicted the individual language performance suggesting a predisposition for the individual ability to process syntactically complex sentences, which manifests itself in the white matter brain structure. Both motifs comprise a number of cortical regions, but seem to be dominated by areas known for the involvement in working memory rather than the classical language network itself. Second, we identified another left hemispheric network motif, whose change of prevalence over the training period significantly correlated with the individual change in performance, thus reflecting training induced white matter plasticity. This motif comprises diverse cortical areas including regions known for their involvement in language processing, working memory and motor functions. The present findings suggest that individual differences in language processing and learning can be explained, in part, by individual differences in the brain's white matter structure. Brain structure may be a crucial factor to be considered when discussing variations in human cognitive performance, more generally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document