Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-11-2009 | Original Article

Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation

Auteurs: Gamze Alpay, Monique Goerke, Birgit Stürmer

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 6/2009

Abstract

Interference effects are largely reduced after cognitive conflicts in previous trials. This sequence-dependent interference adaptation is often seen as a consequence of strategic executive control. We sought to investigate whether sequential modulations are comparable with cue-induced strategic adjustments in spatial interference tasks. If so, reliable cues indicating the next compatibility condition should override effects caused by prior events. To this end, cues were introduced in a spatial stimulus-response compatibility task and a Simon task that either indicated the upcoming trial compatibility (rule cues) or the target position, which was not related to the S-R rule (position cues). The proportion of valid cues was either completely or predominantly valid. In both tasks cueing benefits for absolutely reliable rule cues were clearly present. Remarkably, sequential modulations were not influenced by effective rule cueing and vice versa. Even absolutely reliable information about prospective control demands did not cancel out sequence-dependent interference adaptation. In addition, the contingent negative variation—an event-related brain potential in the cue-target interval that is related to response preparation and readiness—showed additive effects of preceding compatibility and cue reliability. The present results indicate that processes underlying sequence-dependent interference adaptation differ from cue-induced strategic processes of cognitive control.

vorige artikel The elusive link between conflict and conflict adaptation

volgende artikel Conflicts between expected and actually performed behavior lead to verbal report of incidentally acquired sequential knowledge

A comparison of position cues predicting the visual half-field and the response hand revealed no significant difference, t(23) = 2.36, P > 0.08. We, therefore, averaged both position cue conditions for the reported analyses.

The results of the ANOVA including exact trial repetitions yielded a similar pattern of results: SRC, F(1, 23) = 35.07, P < 0.001; validity, F(1, 23) = 26.95, P < 0.001; cue, F(1, 23) = 21.25, P < 0.001; cue × validity, F(1, 23) = 15.17, P < 0.001; cue × validity × compatibility, F(1, 23) = 3.43, P = 0.07; compatibility × preceding compatibility, F(1, 23) = 12.04, P < 0.01; cue × compatibility × preceding compatibility, F(1, 23) = 6.39, P < 0.05.

ANOVA including exact trial repetitions revealed similar results: Compatibility, F(1, 23) = 44.54, P < 0.001; validity, F(1, 23) = 16.11, P < 0.001; preceding compatibility, F(2, 46) = 79.16, P < 0.001 (absent when excluding preceding NoGos); cue × validity, F(1, 23) = 5.96, P < 0.05; cue × compatibility, F(1, 23) = 37.72, P < 0.001; compatibility × preceding compatibility, F(1, 23) = 113.14, P < 0.001; cue × compatibility × preceding compatibility, F(1, 23) = 10.76, P < 0.01.

Akçay, C., & Hazeltine, E. (2007). Feature overlap and conflict monitoring: Two sources of sequential modulations. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 742–748.PubMed

Baddeley, A. (1998). Recent developments in working memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8, 234–238.PubMedCrossRef

Beringer, J. (2001). Experimental Run Time System (ERTS), Version 3.32. Frankfurt: BeriSoft Cooperation.

Botvinick, M. M. (2007). Conflict monitoring and decision making: Reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 356–366.CrossRef

Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652.PubMedCrossRef

Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(12), 539–546.PubMedCrossRef

Braver, T. S., Gray, J. R., & Burgess, G. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. Kane, A. Miyake, J. Towse (Eds.), Variation of working memory. NY:Oxford University Press.

Chwilla, D. J., & Brunia, C. H. (1991). Event-related potentials to different feedback stimuli. Psychophysiology, 28, 123–132.PubMedCrossRef

Cohen, J. D., Botvinick, M. M., & Carter, C. S. (2000). Anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex: who’s in control? Nature Neuroscience, 3, 421–423.PubMedCrossRef

Damen, E. J., & Brunia, C. H. (1994). Is a stimulus conveying task-relevant information a sufficient condition to elicit a stimulus-preceding negativity? Psychophysiology, 31, 129–139.PubMedCrossRef

De Pisapia, N., & Braver, T. S. (2006). A model of dual control mechanisms through anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex interactions. Neurocomputing, 69, 1322–1326.CrossRef

Dosenbach, N. U. F., Fair, D. A., Cohen, A. L., Schlaggar, B. L., & Peterson, S. E. (2008). A dual-networks architecture of top-down control. Trends in Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(3), 99–105.CrossRef

Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 380–390.CrossRef

Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.

Fan, J., Kolster, R., Ghajar, J., Suh, M., Knight, R. T., Sarkar, R., et al. (2007). Response anticipation and response conflict: An event-related potential and functional magnetic resonance imaging study. The Journal of Neuroscience, 27(9), 2272–2282.PubMedCrossRef

Fernandez-Duque, D., & Knight, M. B. (2008). Cognitive control: Dynamic, sustained, and voluntary influences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 340–355.PubMedCrossRef

Freitas, A. L., Bahar, M., Yang, S., & Banai, R. (2007). Contextual adjustments in cognitive control across tasks. Psychological Science, 18, 1040–1043.PubMedCrossRef

Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480–506.CrossRef

Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68, 1–17.PubMedCrossRef

Huynh, H., & Feldt, L. S. (1976). Estimation of the box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in the randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational Statistics, 1, 69–82.CrossRef

Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 188–196.PubMedCrossRef

Kerns, J. G. (2006). Anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex activity in an fMRI study of trial-to-trial adjustments on the Simon task. NeuroImage, 33, 399–405.PubMedCrossRef

Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303, 1023–1026.PubMedCrossRef

Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., I. I. I., Johnson, M. K., Stenger, V. A., Aizenstein, H., et al. (2005). Decreased conflict- and error-related activity in the anterior cingulate cortex in subjects with schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(10), 1833–1839.PubMedCrossRef

Lai, G., & Mangels, J. A. (2007). Cueing effects on semantic and perceptual categorization: ERPs reveal differential effects of validity as a function of processing stage. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2038–2050.PubMedCrossRef

Leuthold, H., Sommer, W., & Ulrich, R. (2004). Preparing for Action: Inferences from CNV and LRP. Journal of Psychophysiology, 18, 77–88.CrossRef

Loveless, N. E., & Sanford, A. J. (1974). Slow potential correlates of preparatory set. Biological Psychology, 1, 303–314.PubMedCrossRef

Mayr, U., & Awh, E. (2008). The elusive link between conflict and conflict adaptation. Psychological Research, this issue.

Mayr, U., Awh, E., & Laurey, P. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 450–452.PubMed

Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167–202.PubMedCrossRef

Nieuwenhuis, S., Stins, J. F., Posthuma, D., Polderman, T. J., Boomsma, D. I., & de Geus, E. J. (2006). Accounting for sequential trial effects in the flanker task: conflict adaptation or associative priming? Memory and Cognition, 34, 1260–1272.

Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2006). Stimulus conflict predicts conflict adaptation in a numerical flanker task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 1078–1084.PubMed

Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2007). Dissociating conflict adaptation from feature integration: a multiple regression account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1256–1260.PubMedCrossRef

Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verbruggen, F., & Liefooghe, B. (2006). Top-down and bottom-up sequential modulations of congruency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 112–117.PubMed

Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.PubMedCrossRef

Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., & Davidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160–174.CrossRef

Praamstra, P., Kleine, B. U., & Schnitzler, A. (1999). Magnetic stimulation of the dorsal premotor cortex modulates the Simon effect. NeuroReport, 10, 3671–3674.PubMedCrossRef

Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: activation and suppression in conflict tasks. Psychological Research, 66, 312–323.PubMedCrossRef

Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., Crone, E. A., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2004). The Role of the Medial Frontal Cortex in Cognitive Control. Science, 306(5695), 443–447.PubMedCrossRef

Roberts, A. C., Robbins, T. W., & Weiskrantz, L. (1998). The prefrontal cortex: Executive and Cognitive Functions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Simon, J. R. (1967). Choice reaction time as a function of auditory S-R correspondence, age and sex. Ergonomics, 10, 559–564.PubMedCrossRef

Smith, E. E., & Jonides, J. (1999). Storage and executive processes in the frontal lobes. Science, 238, 1657–1661.CrossRef

Stoffels, E.-J. (1996). Uncertainty and processing routes in the selection of a response: An S-R compatibility study. Acta Psychologica, 94(2), 227–252.PubMedCrossRef

Stürmer, B., & Leuthold, H. (2003). Control over response priming in visuomotor processing: a lateralized event-related potential study. Experimental Brain Research, 153, 35–44.CrossRef

Stürmer, B., Soetens, E., Sommer, W., Leuthold, H., & Schröter, H. (2002). Control Over Location-Based Response Activation in the Simon Task: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 1345–1363.PubMed

Stürmer, B., Redlich, M., Irlbacher, K., & Brandt, S. (2007). Executive control over response priming and conflict: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Experimental Brain Research, 183(3), 329–339.CrossRef

Ullsperger, M., Bylsma, L. M., & Botvinick, M. M. (2005). The conflict adaptation effect: It’s not just priming. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 5, 467–472.PubMedCrossRef

van Boxtel, G. J. M., & Brunia, C. H. M. (1994). Motor and non-motor components of the Contingent Negative Variation. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 17, 269–279.PubMedCrossRef

Vossel, S., Thiel, C. M., & Fink, G. R. (2006). Cue validity modulates the neural correlates of covert endogenous orienting of attention in parietal and frontal cortex. Neuroimage, 32, 1257–1264.PubMedCrossRef

Weerts, T. C., & Lang, P. J. (1973). The effects of eye fixation and stimulus and response location on the contingent negative variation (CNV). Biological Psychology, 1, 1–19.PubMedCrossRef

Wendt, M., Kluwe, R. H., & Peters, A. (2006). Sequential modulations of interference evoked by processing task-irrelevant stimulus features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 644–667.PubMedCrossRef

Wühr, P., & Ansorge, U. (2005). Exploring trial-by-trial modulations of the Simon effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 58, 705–731.

Wühr, P., & Kunde, W. (2008). Precueing spatial S-R correspondence: is there regulation of expected response conflict? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(4), 838–872.CrossRef

Titel: Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation
Auteurs: Gamze Alpay
Monique Goerke
Birgit Stürmer
Publicatiedatum: 01-11-2009
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 6/2009
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0196-9

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2009

Anticipation of cognitive demand during decision-making

Conflicts as signals: bridging the gap between conflict detection and cognitive control

Individual differences and developmental change in the ERN response: implications for models of ACC function

Conflicts between expected and actually performed behavior lead to verbal report of incidentally acquired sequential knowledge

Lifespan development of stimulus-response conflict cost: similarities and differences between maturation and senescence

Distinct conflict resolution deficits related to different facets of Schizophrenia