Distinct Stages of Moment-to-Moment Processing in the Cinguloopercular and Frontoparietal Networks

Abstract

Control of goal-directed tasks is putatively carried out via the cinguloopercular (CO) and frontoparietal (FP) systems. However, it remains unclear whether these systems show dissociable moment-to-moment processing during distinct stages of a trial. Here, we characterize dynamics in the CO and FP networks in a meta-analysis of 5 decision-making tasks using fMRI, with a specialized "slow reveal" paradigm which allows us to measure the temporal characteristics of trial responses. We find that activations in left FP, right FP, and CO systems form separate clusters, pointing to distinct roles in decision-making. Left FP shows early "accumulator-like" responses, suggesting a role in pre-decision processing. CO has a late onset and transient response linked to the decision event, suggesting a role in performance reporting. The majority of right FP regions show late onsets with prolonged responses, suggesting a role in post-recognition processing. These findings expand upon past models, arguing that the CO and FP systems relate to distinct stages of processing within a trial. Furthermore, the findings provide evidence for a heterogeneous profile in the FP network, with left and right FP taking on specialized roles. This evidence informs our understanding of how distinct control networks may coordinate moment-to-moment components of complex actions.

Neural correlates of conventional and harm/welfare-based moral decision-making

“…This may reflect similar computational processes occurring for harm/welfare-based transgressions and conventional transgressions, potentially involving performance reporting/monitoring (c.f. Droutman et al, 2015; Gratton et al, 2016), but that these occur more strongly for harm/welfare-based transgressions. Two caveats should be noted with respect to this conclusion, however.…”

“…An alternative view regarding the function of these regions has suggested that they play a more attentional role and are implicated in initializing a task set and maintaining it within a trial (Dosenbach et al, 2006; Power & Petersen, 2013; Sestieri, Corbetta, Spadone, Romani, & Shulman, 2014). It is argued that they play a role in performance reporting when adjustments are required by the task (Gratton et al, 2016). The current study was not designed to, and cannot distinguish, between these accounts.…”

“…It is not inconceivable to suggest that the activity seen here to both moral and conventional transgressions represented some form of performance reporting given the requirement for adjustments in decision-making based on prior knowledge (c.f. Gratton et al, 2016). Notably, however, these decision-making regions are active during affect-based decisions generally, not just during moral decision-making.…”

“…Two caveats should be noted with respect to this conclusion, however. Performance reporting/monitoring has been related to longer reaction times (Droutman et al, 2015; Gratton et al, 2016; Neta, Nelson, & Petersen, 2016). Yet, reaction times for conventional transgressions were longer than those to harm/welfare-based transgressions.…”

Modulación del procesamiento cerebral por la magnitud de la recompensa en tareas de control cognitivo en participantes sanos y adictos a la cocaína

“…On the one hand, the FPN has been involved in self-regulation, allowing people to control their thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and desires (Kelley, Wagner, & Heatherton, 2015). In fact, control of goal-directed tasks has been carried out via the frontoparietal systems Gratton et al, 2016). On the other hand, the inferior frontal-parietal-ventral insula network showed a greater attentional bias effect for cocaine cues, which was interpreted as the involvement of this functional network in orienting stimulus-driven attention and the detection of the salience of behaviorally relevant stimuli (Kilts et al, 2014).…”