Processing linguistic variation through dual mechanisms of cognitive control

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (s1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Grant M. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
Connectionist Model ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Control Hypothesis

AbstractWhile rarely difficult for the average speaker/listener, the ubiquity of variation at all levels of linguistic production is a challenge for modern psycholinguistic models of language processing. Variation is perhaps most extreme at the levels of phonetics and phonology, but many models of language processing all but eschew these levels altogether. The current paper posits that cognitive control mechanisms, when divided into proactive and reactive control via a dual mechanisms framework may effectively describe the strategies individuals use to process linguistic variation and, when incorporated into language processing models, can generate novel, testable predictions regarding the origin and propagation of individual differences. By means of example, I illustrate how dual mechanisms of control could be incorporated into a connectionist model of language production. I then describe how dual mechanisms of cognitive control might be relevant for the Adaptive Control Hypothesis and how individual differences in processing strategies may modulate participation in language changes-in-progress.

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.

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 Individual Differences in the Balance of GABA to Glutamate in pFC Predict the Ability to Select among Competing Options

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 2490-2502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro de la Vega ◽  
Mark S. Brown ◽  
Hannah R. Snyder ◽  
Debra Singel ◽  
Yuko Munakata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Executive Function ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Resonance Spectroscopy ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Excitatory Neurotransmitters ◽  
Neural Transmission ◽  
Neural Underpinnings ◽  
Relevant Word

Individuals vary greatly in their ability to select one item or response when presented with a multitude of options. Here we investigate the neural underpinnings of these individual differences. Using magnetic resonance spectroscopy, we found that the balance of inhibitory versus excitatory neurotransmitters in pFC predicts the ability to select among task-relevant options in two language production tasks. The greater an individual's concentration of GABA relative to glutamate in the lateral pFC, the more quickly he or she could select a relevant word from among competing options. This outcome is consistent with our computational modeling of this task [Snyder, H. R., Hutchison, N., Nyhus, E., Curran, T., Banich, M. T., O'Reilly, R. C., et al. Neural inhibition enables selection during language processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 107, 16483–16488, 2010], which predicts that greater net inhibition in pFC increases the efficiency of resolving competition among task-relevant options. Moreover, the association with the GABA/glutamate ratio was specific to selection and was not observed for executive function ability in general. These findings are the first to link the balance of excitatory and inhibitory neural transmission in pFC to specific aspects of executive function.

scholarly journals Proactive and reactive control mechanisms in navigational search

2020 ◽  
pp. 174702182095892
Author(s):  
Josie Briscoe ◽  
Iain D Gilchrist
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Target Location ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Control Mode ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Search Behaviour ◽  
Flashing Light

Reactive and proactive cognitive control are fundamental for guiding complex human behaviour. In two experiments, we evaluated the role of both types of cognitive control in navigational search. Participants searched for a single hidden target in a floor array where the salience at the search locations varied (flashing or static lights). An a-priori rule of the probable location of the target (either under a static or a flashing light) was provided at the start of each experiment. Both experiments demonstrated a bias towards rule-adherent locations. Search errors, measured as revisits, were more likely to occur under the flashing rule for searching flashing locations, regardless of the salience of target location in Experiment 1 and at rule-congruent (flashing) locations in Experiment 2. Consistent with dual mechanisms of control, rule-adherent search was explained by engaging proactive control to guide goal-maintained search behaviour and by engaging reactive control to avoid revisits to salient (flashing) locations. Experiment 2 provided direct evidence for dual mechanisms of control using a Dot Pattern Expectancy task to distinguish the dominant control mode for a participant. Participants with a reactive control mode generated more revisits to salient (flashing) locations. These data point to complementary roles for proactive and reactive control in guiding navigational search and propose a novel framework for interpreting navigational search.

scholarly journals Bilingual Language Control and General Purpose Cognitive Control among Individuals with Bilingual Aphasia: Evidence Based on Negative Priming and Flanker Tasks

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanya Dash ◽  
Bhoomika R. Kar
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Negative Priming ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Interactive Systems ◽  
Cumulative Distribution ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Bilingual Aphasia

Background. Bilingualism results in an added advantage with respect to cognitive control. The interaction between bilingual language control and general purpose cognitive control systems can also be understood by studying executive control among individuals with bilingual aphasia.Objectives. The current study examined the subcomponents of cognitive control in bilingual aphasia. A case study approach was used to investigate whether cognitive control and language control are two separate systems and how factors related to bilingualism interact with control processes.Methods. Four individuals with bilingual aphasia performed a language background questionnaire, picture description task, and two experimental tasks (nonlinguistic negative priming task and linguistic and nonlinguistic versions of flanker task).Results. A descriptive approach was used to analyse the data using reaction time and accuracy measures. The cumulative distribution function plots were used to visualize the variations in performance across conditions. The results highlight the distinction between general purpose cognitive control and bilingual language control mechanisms.Conclusion. All participants showed predominant use of the reactive control mechanism to compensate for the limited resources system. Independent yet interactive systems for bilingual language control and general purpose cognitive control were postulated based on the experimental data derived from individuals with bilingual aphasia.

scholarly journals Cognitive Control and Discourse Comprehension in Schizophrenia

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan A. Boudewyn ◽  
Cameron S. Carter ◽  
Tamara Y. Swaab
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Discourse Comprehension ◽  
General Control ◽  
Healthy Human ◽  
Conflicting Information ◽  
Control Functions ◽  
Wide Range

Cognitive deficits across a wide range of domains have been consistently observed in schizophrenia and are linked to poor functional outcome (Green, 1996; Carter, 2006). Language abnormalities are among the most salient and include disorganized speech as well as deficits in comprehension. In this review, we aim to evaluate impairments of language processing in schizophrenia in relation to a domain-general control deficit. We first provide an overview of language comprehension in the healthy human brain, stressing the role of cognitive control processes, especially during discourse comprehension. We then discuss cognitive control deficits in schizophrenia, before turning to evidence suggesting that schizophrenia patients are particularly impaired at processing meaningful discourse as a result of deficits in control functions. We conclude that domain-general control mechanisms are impaired in schizophrenia and that during language comprehension this is most likely to result in difficulties during the processing of discourse-level context, which involves integrating and maintaining multiple levels of meaning. Finally, we predict that language comprehension in schizophrenia patients will be most impaired during discourse processing. We further suggest that discourse comprehension problems in schizophrenia might be mitigated when conflicting information is absent and strong relations amongst individual words are present in the discourse context.

scholarly journals Proactive versus reactive emotion regulation: A dual-mechanisms perspective

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruna Martins ◽  
Lyneé A. Alves ◽  
Kimberly Sarah Chiew
Keyword(s):  
Emotion Regulation ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Cognitive Tasks ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Regulation Strategies

Emotion regulation relies on cognitive processing, but the foundational cognitive control mechanisms engaged remain unclear. The process model of emotion regulation posits that different strategies occur at different points in time, with antecedent strategies occurring early and response-focused strategies later in the affective timecourse, with cognitive processing supporting these strategies following a similar timecourse. In parallel, the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) theoretical framework (Braver, 2012; Braver, Gray, &amp; Burgess, 2007; Chiew &amp; Braver, 2017) proposes that cognitive control operates via two temporally-distinct modes: anticipatory preparation to perform cognitive tasks (proactive), and momentary engagement in cognitive tasks as they arise (reactive). However, empirical investigations of the role of proactive and reactive control in emotion regulation have been limited. In this paper, we summarize and integrate these two theoretical perspectives. We first posit that any emotion regulation strategy may take place either early or late in the affective timecourse, depending on whether it is proactively or reactively enacted. We next provide examples of different strategies from the process model and their engagement in both control modes. In addition, we discuss how strategic dependence on the downstream emotional stimulus and response could further affect the timecourse and cognitive load of emotion regulation strategies. We conclude by discussing how controlling for timing in future research designs may clarify how populations with reduced cognitive control may demonstrate intact emotion regulation (i.e., through greater reliance on reactive strategies), and how incorporation of the DMC perspective may inform applied emotion regulation interventions for clinical populations.

scholarly journals The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) project: Validation of an on-line behavioral task battery

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rongxiang Tang ◽  
Julie Bugg ◽  
Jean-Paul Snijder ◽  
Andrew R. A. Conway ◽  
Todd Samuel Braver
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Selective Attention ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Behavioral Task ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Context Processing ◽  
On Line

Cognitive control serves a crucial role in human higher mental functions. The Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) account provides a unifying theoretical framework that decomposes cognitive control into two qualitatively distinct mechanisms – proactive control and reactive control. While prior behavioral and neuroimaging work has demonstrated the validity of individual tasks in isolating these two mechanisms of control, there has not been a comprehensive, theoretically-guided task battery specifically designed to tap into proactive and reactive control across different domains of cognition. To address this critical limitation and provide useful methodological tools for future investigations, the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) task battery was developed to probe these two control modes, as well as their intra-individual and inter-individual differences, across four prototypical domains of cognition: selective attention, context processing, multi-tasking, and working memory. We present this task battery, along with detailed descriptions of the experimental manipulations used to encourage shifts to proactive or reactive control in each of the four task domains. We rigorously evaluate the group effects of these manipulations in primary indices of proactive and reactive control, establishing the validity of the DMCC task battery in providing dissociable yet convergent measures of the two cognitive control modes.

The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control Project

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Todd S. Braver ◽  
Alexander Kizhner ◽  
Rongxiang Tang ◽  
Michael C. Freund ◽  
Joset A. Etzel
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Monozygotic Twin ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Full Data ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Project Completion ◽  
Prefrontal Function ◽  
Human Connectome Project ◽  
Spatio Temporal

Abstract We describe an ambitious ongoing study that has been strongly influenced and inspired by Don Stuss's career-long efforts to identify key cognitive processes that characterize executive control, investigate potential unifying dimensions that define prefrontal function, and carefully attend to individual differences. The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control project tests a theoretical framework positing two key control dimensions: proactive and reactive. The framework's central tenets are that proactive and reactive control modes reflect domain-general dimensions of individual variation, with distinctive neural signatures, involving the lateral pFC as a central node within associated brain networks (e.g., fronto-parietal, cingulo-opercular). In the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control project, each participant is scanned while performing theoretically targeted variants of multiple well-established cognitive control tasks (Stroop, cued task-switching, AX-CPT, Sternberg working memory) in three separate imaging sessions, that each encourages utilization of different control modes plus also completes an extensive out-of-scanner individual differences battery. Additional key features of the project include a high spatio-temporal resolution (multiband) acquisition protocol and a sample that includes a substantial subset of monozygotic twin pairs and participants recruited from the Human Connectome Project. Although data collection is still continuing (target n = 200), we provide an overview of the study design and protocol, along with initial results (n = 80) revealing evidence of a domain-general neural signature of cognitive control and its modulation under reactive conditions. Aligned with Don Stuss's legacy of scientific community building, a partial data set has been publicly released, with the full data set released at project completion, so it can serve as a valuable resource.

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>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document