Time for Action: Neural Basis of the Costs and Benefits of Temporal Predictability for Competing Response Choices

The brain can anticipate the time of imminent events to optimize sensorimotor processing. Yet, there can be behavioral costs of temporal predictability under situations of response conflict. Here, we sought to identify the neural basis of these costs and benefits by examining motor control processes in a combined electroencephalography–EMG study. We recorded electrophysiological markers of response activation and inhibition over motor cortex when the onset-time of visual targets could be predicted, or not, and when responses necessitated conflict resolution, or not. If stimuli were temporally predictable but evoked conflicting responses, we observed increased intertrial consistency in the delta range over the motor cortex involved in response implementation, perhaps reflecting increased response difficulty. More importantly, temporal predictability differentially modulated motor cortex activity as a function of response conflict before the response was even initiated. This effect occurred in the hemisphere ipsilateral to the response, which is involved in inhibiting unwanted actions. If target features all triggered the same response, temporal predictability increased cortical inhibition of the incorrect response hand. Conversely, if different target features triggered two conflicting responses, temporal predictability decreased inhibition of the incorrect, yet prepotent, response. This dissociation reconciles the well-established behavioral benefits of temporal predictability for nonconflicting responses as well as its costs for conflicting ones by providing an elegant mechanism that operates selectively over the motor cortex involved in suppressing inappropriate actions just before response initiation. Taken together, our results demonstrate that temporal information differentially guides motor activity depending on response choice complexity.

Biophysical and Architectural Mechanisms of Subthalamic Theta under Response Conflict

The cortico-basal ganglia circuit is needed to suppress prepotent actions and to facilitate controlled behavior. Under conditions of response conflict, the frontal cortex and subthalamic nucleus [STN] exhibit increased spiking and theta band power, which are linked to adaptive regulation of behavioral output. The electrophysiological mechanisms underlying these neural signatures of impulse control remain poorly understood. To address this lacuna, we constructed a novel large-scale, biophysically principled model of the subthalamopallidal [STN-Globus Pallidus externus (GPe)] network, and examined the mechanisms that modulate theta power and spiking in response to cortical input. Simulations confirmed that theta power does not emerge from intrinsic network dynamics but is robustly elicited in response to cortical input as burst events representing action selection dynamics. Rhythmic burst events of multiple cortical populations, representing a state of conflict where cortical motor plans vacillate in the theta range, led to prolonged STN theta and increased spiking, consistent with empirical literature. Notably, theta band signaling required NMDA, but not AMPA, currents, which were in turn related to a triphasic STN response characterized by spiking, silence and bursting periods. Finally, theta band resonance was also strongly modulated by architectural connectivity, with maximal theta arising when multiple cortical populations project to individual STN "conflict detector" units, due to an NMDA-dependent supralinear response. Our results provide insights into the biophysical principles and architectural constraints that give rise to STN dynamics during response conflict, and how their disruption can lead to impulsivity and compulsivity.

Stimulus-Response Conflict Tasks and Their Use in Clinical Psychology

This article reviews the historical usage of the concept of ‘conflict’ in psychology and delineates the design and development of three basic conflict tasks (Stroop, Flanker, Stop Signal). Afterwards, important theoretical concepts to account for conflict processing are introduced. In the second part, the usage of these tasks in clinical psychology is considered. The article closes with some reflections regarding factors that may have been hitherto largely neglected in this respect.

Interference suppression in bilingualism: Stimulus-Stimulus vs. Stimulus-Response conflict

Studies examining the potential effects of bilingualism on interference suppression show inconsistent results. Our study approaches this topic by distinguishing two potential subcomponents within interference suppression (i.e., Stimulus-Stimulus and Stimulus-Response conflict). We investigated the two subcomponents through their operationalisation in different tasks and examined the role of language proficiency in modulating it. A sample of 111 young adult participants performed four non-linguistic cognitive tasks measuring both visual and auditory domains of cognitive control. Bilinguals outperformed monolinguals in tasks involving Stimulus-Stimulus conflict, but showed comparable performance in tasks involving Stimulus-Response conflict. Specific effects of language proficiency on cognitive control were observed: group differences in auditory inhibition and visual orienting were only observed between high-proficient bilinguals and monolinguals. Taken together, types of conflicts involved in interference tasks and language proficiency could differentially affect performance in monolinguals and bilinguals.

Parsing the Neural Mechanisms of Short-Term and Long-Term Associations in the Flanker Tasks: An ERP Analysis

The neural mechanisms of cognitive conflicts within various flanker tasks are still unclear, which may be mixed with different effects of short-term associations and long-term associations. We applied a perceptual (color) flanker task and a symbolic (arrow) flanker task to 25 healthy young adults, while the event-related potentials (ERP) and behavioral performance were recorded. The former contains stimulus-stimulus conflict (SSC) of short-term memory (STM) associations, and the latter contains stimulus-response conflict (SRC) of long-term memory (LTM) associations. Both flanker tasks included congruent and incongruent conditions. The reaction time demonstrated the stimulus-response conflict effect in the arrow flanker task without the stimulus-stimulus conflict effect in the color flanker task. The ERP results showed SSC enhanced the frontocentral N2b without behavioral effects. SRC increased the frontocentral P2 but decreased the centroparietal P3b with prolonged reaction time. In the comparison between both tasks, the color flanker task elicited both the centroparietal N2b/N300 and the frontocentral N400, and the arrow flanker task increased the occipital N1. Our findings provide new evidence that different neural mechanisms underlie conflict effects based on different types of memory associations.

Frontal midline theta differentiates separate cognitive control strategies while still generalizing the need for cognitive control

Cognitive control processes encompass many distinct components, including response inhibition (stopping a prepotent response), proactive control (using prior information to enact control), reactive control (last-minute changing of a prepotent response), and conflict monitoring (choosing between two competing responses). While frontal midline theta activity is theorized to be a general marker of the need for cognitive control, a stringent test of this hypothesis would require a quantitative, within-subject comparison of the neural activation patterns indexing many different cognitive control strategies, an experiment lacking in the current literature. We recorded EEG from 176 participants as they performed tasks that tested inhibitory control (Go/Nogo Task), proactive and reactive control (AX-Continuous Performance Task), and resolving response conflict (Global/Local Task-modified Flanker Task). As activity in the theta (4–8 Hz) frequency band is thought to be a common signature of cognitive control, we assessed frontal midline theta activation underlying each cognitive control strategy. In all strategies, we found higher frontal midline theta power for trials that required more cognitive control (target conditions) versus control conditions. Additionally, reactive control and inhibitory control had higher theta power than proactive control and response conflict, and proactive control had higher theta power than response conflict. Using decoding analyses, we were able to successfully decode control from target trials using classifiers trained exclusively on each of the other strategies, thus firmly demonstrating that theta representations of cognitive control generalize across multiple cognitive control strategies. Our results confirm that frontal midline theta-band activity is a common mechanism for initiating and executing cognitive control, but theta power also differentiates between cognitive control mechanisms. As theta activation reliably differs depending on the cognitive control strategy employed, future work will need to focus on the differential role of theta in differing cognitive control strategies.