Towards an Ontology of Cognitive Control

Abstract

The goal of cognitive neuroscience is to map mental functions onto their neural substrates. We argue here that this goal requires a formal approach to the characterization of mental processes, and we present one such approach by using ontologies to describe cognitive processes and their relations. Using a classifier analysis of data from the BrainMap database, we examine the concept of ''cognitive control'' to determine whether the proposed component processes in this domain are mapped to independent neural systems. These results show that some subcomponents can be uniquely classified, whereas others cannot, suggesting that these different components may vary in their ontological reality. We relate these concepts to the broader emerging field of phenomics, which aims to characterize cognitive phenotypes on a global scale.

Are the neural correlates of stopping and not going identical? Quantitative meta-analysis of two response inhibition tasks

“…The response inhibition construct currently subsumes GNG, SST, and anti-saccade tasks under one heading. Presumably, if these tasks activate non-overlapping brain regions, then they reflect the engagement of different cognitive processes to some degree (Lenartowicz et al, 2010). From a practical standpoint, impaired performance on either of these tasks in patient populations is often taken as an indication of specific PFC abnormalities (Clark et al, 2007) or frontal lobe dysfunction more generally (Barkley et al, 1992;van der Schoot et al, 2000).…”

“…Performance is modeled as a "race" between "go" and "stop" processes, and the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) is calculated as a measure of inhibitory control. Although these two tasks are often treated interchangeably (Aron et al, 2004;Lenartowicz et al, 2010), it is unclear whether they tap the same cognitive processes and neural substrates. Better understanding of the neural systems common to performance in both tasks and those unique to each task will help with the interpretation of extant literature and design of future studies.…”

“…From a theoretical perspective, new efforts to develop formal ontologies of cognitive control functions rely on observable indicators, i.e. behavioral performance and brain activation measures obtained from specific tasks (Lenartowicz et al, 2010). The response inhibition construct currently subsumes GNG, SST, and anti-saccade tasks under one heading.…”

“…We wished to determine whether (and to what extent) the neuroanatomical correlates of task performance in GNG and SST can be dissociated. If they activate nonoverlapping brain regions, one can assume that the two tasks engage different cognitive processes (Lenartowicz et al, 2010). We used the Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) method, a quantitative metaanalysis technique (Laird et al, 2005a) to infer function-location relationships from the functional neuroimaging literature.…”

Integrative Modeling and the Role of Neural Constraints

“…As a "proof of concept" for this strategy, Lenartowicz et al (2010) surveyed the imaging literature to see whether psychological processes associated with cognitive control could be neurally discriminated from one another. They searched the literature for a set of labels for different processes associated with cognitive control and retrieved from the BrainMap database the regions that manifested peaks of activity on tasks invoking those processes.…”