Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Current theories describe cognitive control as a dynamic balance between two antagonistic control functions, namely cognitive stability and flexibility. Recent evidence suggests that this balance between these control modes is modulated by changing reward prospects on the one side and contextual parameters on the other. In the present study, we aim to investigate how both factors interact. In a between-subjects design, we manipulated the context by the ratio of free- to forced-choice trials (80:20, 50:50, 20:80) in a hybrid task-switching paradigm, combining forced- and free-choice task switching. In addition, two reward magnitudes changed randomly from trial to trial. Results showed an overall increase in voluntary switch rate (VSR) with increasing forced-choice frequency, demonstrating a robust context effect. Moreover, the trial-by-trial reward manipulation interacted with this global context effect: with a stability bias (80% free:20% forced), only an increase in reward expectation increased VSR, whereas with a more flexible global bias (in the 50:50 or 20:80 conditions) VSR increased when reward expectation changed and reduced when reward expectation remained high. Taken together, results suggest that the cognitive system is able to adapt to global context parameters and to respond to rapid changes in reward expectation at the same time.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Arrington, C. M., Reiman, K. M., & Weaver, S. M. (2014). Voluntary task switching. In J. Grange & G. Houghton (Eds.), Task switching and cognitive control (pp. 117–136). Oxford: University Press. CrossRef
Braver, T. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2000). On the control of control: The role of dopamine in regulating prefrontal function and working momory. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 713–738). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cohen, J. D., Aston-Jones, G., & Gilzenrat, M. S. (2004). A systems-level perspective on attention and cognitive control: Guided activation, adaptive gating, conflict monitoring, and exploitation versus exploration. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of attention (pp. 71–90). New York: Guilford Press.
Goschke, T. (2003). Voluntary action and cognitive control from a neuroscience perspective. In S. Maasen, W. Prinz, & G. Roth (Eds.), Voluntary action. Brains, minds, and sociality (pp. 49–85). Oxford: University Press.
Goschke, T. (2013). Volition in action: Intentions control dilemmas and the dynamic regulation of intentional control. In W. Prinz, M. Beisert, & A. Herwig (Eds.), Action science: Foundations of an emerging discipline (pp. 409–434). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Grange, J., & Houghton, G. (Eds.). (2014). Task switching and cognitive control. Oxford: University Press.
Hommel, B. (2015). Between persistence and flexibility: The Yin and Yang of action control. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 2, pp. 33–67). Waltham: Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/bs.adms.2015.04.003.
Müller, J., Dreisbach, G., Goschke, T., Hensch, T., Lesch, K.-P., & Brocke, B. (2007). Dopamine and cognitive control: The prospect of monetary gains influences the balance between flexibility and stability in a set-shifting paradigm. European Journal of Neuroscience, 26(12), 3661–3668. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05949.x. CrossRefPubMed
- The dynamic balance between cognitive flexibility and stability: the influence of local changes in reward expectation and global task context on voluntary switch rate
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg