Automatic effects of instructions do not require the intention to execute these instructions

Liefooghe, Baptist; Houwer, Jan De

doi:10.1080/20445911.2017.1365871

Cited by 34 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In principle, as proposed by the serial-coding hypothesis, they could reflect the emergence of procedural representations, in detriment of merely declarative signals 16,20 . However, the same pattern of results could be explained by a mere amplification of preserved declarative representations 2 . Last, the results could reflect both declarative preservation and procedural activation, as predicted by a dual-coding hypothesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Last, a target screen appeared (1500 ms) followed by a jittered ITI. The target screen differed in the two localizers and was inspired by previous studies investigating the dissociation of implementing vs. memorizing new instructions 2,3,16 . In the procedural localizer, the target was identical to the one in the main task.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous behavioral studies have consistently reported an intriguing signature of instruction processing, namely, a reflexive activation of responses on the basis of merely instructed stimulus-response (S-R) associations (defined as “intention-based reflexivity”, or IBR). IBR occurs even when instructions are task-irrelevant and have not been overtly executed before 2–7 , which suggests a rapid configuration of instructed content predominantly towards action. Instruction implementation also has a profound impact on brain activity, as shown by electroencephalography and fMRI studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, at least two alternatives to the serial coding hypothesis could explain previous results. First, an amplification hypothesis disputes the notion of two independent representational states and proposes that the intention to implement rather induces deeper declarative processing of the initial semantic information conveyed by the instruction 2 . Under this proposal, the FPN would support instruction implementation through the preservation of relevant declarative signals rather than through a transformation of these signals into an action-oriented code.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Frontoparietal action-oriented codes support novel instruction implementation

González-García

Formica

Wisniewski

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

12A key aspect of human cognitive flexibility concerns the ability to rapidly convert 13 complex symbolic instructions into novel behaviors. Previous research proposes 14 that this fast configuration is supported by two differentiated neurocognitive states, 15 namely, an initial declarative maintenance of task knowledge, and a progressive 16 transformation into a pragmatic, action-oriented state necessary for optimal task 17 execution. Furthermore, current models predict a crucial role of frontal and parietal 18 brain regions in this transformation. However, direct evidence for such 19 frontoparietal formatting of novel task representations is still lacking. Here, we 20 report the results of an fMRI experiment in which participants had to execute novel 21 instructed stimulus-response associations. We then used a multivariate pattern-22 tracking procedure to quantify the degree of neural activation of instructions in 23 declarative and procedural representational formats. This analysis revealed, for the 24 first time, format-unique representations of relevant task sets in frontoparietal 25 areas, prior to execution. Critically, the degree of procedural (but not declarative) 26 activation predicted subsequent behavioral performance. Our results shed light on 27 current debates on the architecture of cognitive control and working memory 28 systems, suggesting a contribution of frontoparietal regions to output gating 29 mechanisms that drive behavior. 30 31 32Some of the most advanced collaborative human achievements rely on our ability 33 to rapidly learn novel tasks. Instruction following constitutes a powerful instance of 34 this ability as it combines the flexibility to specify complex abstract relationships 35 with an efficiency far superior to other forms of task learning such as trial and error, 36 or reinforcement learning. These unique characteristics make it a distinctive skill 37 that separates humans from other species 1 . While recent years have witnessed 38 substantial progress in our understanding of instruction following, the neural and 39 cognitive mechanisms underlying this rapid transformation of complex symbolic 40 information into effective behavior are still poorly understood. Specifically, a critical 41 question that remains unresolved is whether a declarative representation of task 42 information is sufficient or whether an additional representational state, closely 43 linked to action, precedes optimal performance. 44Previous behavioral studies have consistently reported an intriguing signature of 45 instruction processing, namely, a reflexive activation of responses on the basis of 46 merely instructed stimulus-response (S-R) associations (defined as "intention-47 based reflexivity", or IBR). IBR occurs even when instructions are task-irrelevant 48 and have not been overtly executed before 2-7 , which suggests a rapid 49 configuration of instructed content predominantly towards action. Instruction 50 implementation also has a profound impact on brain activity, as shown by 5...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Frontoparietal action-oriented codes support novel instruction implementation

González-García

Formica

Wisniewski

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As previous literature extensively shows ( Vandierendonck, 2017 , 2018 ; Liefooghe and De Houwer, 2018 ), LISAS is more sensitive and efficient because it integrates two complementary aspects (RT and subjects’ accuracy) into one single score. Our second goal was to investigate the frame of reference in tactile mental magnitude mechanisms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Magnitude Effect on Tactile Spatial Representation: The Spatial–Tactile Association for Response Code (STARC) Effect

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human brain uses perceptual information to create a correct representation of the external world. Converging data indicate that the perceptual processing of, space, and quantities frequently is based on a shared mental magnitude system, where low and high quantities are represented in the left and right space, respectively. The present study explores how the magnitude affects spatial representation in the tactile modality. We investigated these processes using stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility tasks (i.e., sensorimotor tasks that present an association/dissociation between the perception of a stimulus and the required action, generally increasing/decreasing accuracy and decreasing/increasing reaction times of the subject). In our study, the participant performed a discrimination task between high- and low-frequency vibrotactile stimuli, regardless of the stimulation’s spatial position. When the response code was incompatible with the mental magnitude line (i.e., left button for high-frequency and right button for low-frequency responses), we found that the participants bypassed the spatial congruence, showing a magnitude S-R compatibility effect. We called this phenomenon the Spatial–Tactile Association of Response Codes (STARC) effect. Moreover, we observed that the internal frame of reference embodies the STARC effect. Indeed, the participants’ performance reversed between uncrossed- and crossed-hands posture, suggesting that spatial reference frames play a role in the process of expressing mental magnitude, at least in terms of the tactile modality.

show abstract