Conflict Adaptation

Egner, Tobias

doi:10.1002/9781118920497.ch4

Cited by 73 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…With regard to the development of a comprehensive task theory of the WCST, the current data imply that a response-level of behavioral control should be considered, in addition to higher levels of executive control [28] (for a comprehensive overview, see [29]). More specifically, the selection of reference cards on the WCST seems to be modulated by punishment, in a manner that is independent of the presented stimulus card or the currently prevailing task rule.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nowadays, it is less common to consider the possibility that learning at the level of motor responses may also contribute to WCST performance. This is surprising given that predominant theoretical frameworks, both in neuropsychology (e.g., [27]) and in cognitive neuroscience (e.g., [28,29]), typically involve multiple, hierarchically organized levels of control processes. In fact, as early as 1965, Luria [30] already distinguished between cognitive perseveration (an inability to change an afferent readiness) and motor perseveration (an inability to change an efferent readiness).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiple Levels of Control Processes for Wisconsin Card Sorts: An Observational Study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explored short-term behavioral plasticity on the Modified Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (M-WCST) by deriving novel error metrics by stratifying traditional set loss and perseverative errors. Separating the rule set and the response set allowed for the measurement of performance across four trial types, crossing rule set (i.e., maintain vs. switch) and response demand (i.e., repeat vs. alternate). Critically, these four trial types can be grouped based on trial-wise feedback on t − 1 trials. Rewarded (correct) maintain t − 1 trials should lead to error enhancement when the response demands shift from repeat to alternate. In contrast, punished (incorrect) t − 1 trials should lead to error suppression when the response demands shift from repeat to alternate. The results supported the error suppression prediction: An error suppression effect (ESE) was observed across numerous patient samples. Exploratory analyses show that the ESE did not share substantial portions of variance with traditional neuropsychological measures of executive functioning. They further point into the direction that striatal or limbic circuit neuropathology may be associated with enhanced ESE. These data suggest that punishment of the recently executed response induces behavioral avoidance, which is detectable as the ESE on the WCST. The assessment of the ESE might provide an index of response-related avoidance learning on the WCST.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Levels of Control Processes for Wisconsin Card Sorts: An Observational Study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The extreme case of such logic is the currently ongoing debate on the extent to which conflict adaptation markers (i.e., CSE, LWPCE, ISPCE, CSPCE) can be ´explained away´ by learning and memory processes (for reviews see Schmidt, 2013Schmidt, , 2018. A related but potentially more synergetic approach is to understand conflict adaptation as evolving itself from learning processes (Egner, 2014, 2017, Verguts & Notebaert, 2008. Verguts and Notebaert, for example, proposed a computational model in which conflict serves as a teaching signal to drive adaptation: Upon conflict detection, all currently active representations are (further) strengthened, and because active representations are typically task-relevant, this results in increased control.…”

Section: Learning-based Conflict Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does incidental sequence learning allow us to better manage upcoming conflicting events?

Jiménez

Abrahamse

Méndez

et al. 2019

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent proposals emphasize the role of learning in empirical markers of conflict adaptation. Some of these proposals are rooted in the assumption that contingency learning works not only on stimulus-response events but also on covert processes such as selective attention. In the present study we explored how these learning processes may apply to trial-to-trial modulations of selective attention, mirroring the sequential nature of congruency sequence effects. Two groups of participants performed a four-choice Stroop task in which the color to which they responded on each trial acted as a probabilistic predictor either of the external response to be emitted on the next trial, or the congruency level (and therefore control demands) on the next trial. The results showed clear effects of sequence learning for external responses, but no evidence of learning about sequential stimulus-conflict associations. The implications of these results are discussed in relation to other learning-based phenomena of conflict adaptation, and suggest that learning of stimulus-control associations are strongly constrained by event boundaries.

show abstract

“…‘Cognitive control’ describes a collection of neurocognitive mechanisms that allow us to use internal goals and ongoing context to strategically bias the manner in which we process information ( Miller and Cohen, 2001 ; Egner, 2017 ). For instance, depending on current goals, humans can flexibly switch or update ‘task-sets’ that allow them to shift between different aspects of a stimulus to which they attend and respond ( Monsell, 2003 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated externally and internally generated task predictions jointly guide cognitive control in prefrontal cortex

Jiang

Wagner

Egner

2018

eLife

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive control proactively configures information processing to suit expected task demands. Predictions of forthcoming demand can be driven by explicit external cues or be generated internally, based on past experience (cognitive history). However, it is not known whether and how the brain reconciles these two sources of information to guide control. Pairing a probabilistic task-switching paradigm with computational modeling, we found that external and internally generated predictions jointly guide task preparation, with a bias for internal predictions. Using model-based neuroimaging, we then show that the two sources of task prediction are integrated in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and jointly inform a representation of the likelihood of a change in task demand, encoded in frontoparietal cortex. Upon task-stimulus onset, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex encoded the need for reactive task-set adjustment. These data reveal how the human brain integrates external cues and cognitive history to prepare for an upcoming task.

show abstract

Conflict Adaptation

Cited by 73 publications

References 76 publications

Multiple Levels of Control Processes for Wisconsin Card Sorts: An Observational Study

Multiple Levels of Control Processes for Wisconsin Card Sorts: An Observational Study

Does incidental sequence learning allow us to better manage upcoming conflicting events?

Integrated externally and internally generated task predictions jointly guide cognitive control in prefrontal cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About