Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Nov 22;7:1822.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01822. eCollection 2016.

Inducing Proactive Control Shifts in the AX-CPT

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Inducing Proactive Control Shifts in the AX-CPT

Corentin Gonthier et al. Front Psychol. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

The Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) account (Braver, 2012) proposes two distinct mechanisms of cognitive control, proactive and reactive. This account has been supported by a large number of studies using the AX-CPT paradigm that have demonstrated not only between-group differences, but also within-subjects variability in the use of the two control mechanisms. Yet there has been little investigation of task manipulations that can experimentally modulate the use of proactive control in healthy young adults; such manipulations could be useful to better understand the workings of cognitive control mechanisms. In the current study, a series of three experiments demonstrate how individuals can be systematically biased toward and away from the utilization of proactive control, via strategy training and no-go manipulations, respectively. These results provide increased support for the DMC framework, and provide a new basis from which to examine group-based differences and neural mechanisms underlying the two control modes.

Keywords: AX-CPT; Dual Mechanisms of Control; cognitive control; no-go manipulation; proactive control; strategy training.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Average error rates in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 1). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean (Morey, 2008).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Average response times in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 1). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Average error rates in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 2). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Average response times in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 2). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Average error rates in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 3). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean.
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Average response times in the AX-CPT as a function of trial type and task condition (Experiment 3). Error bars represent within-subjects standard errors of the mean.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 11 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Badre D. (2008). Cognitive control, hierarchy, and the rostro-caudal organization of the frontal lobes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12 193–200. 10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.004 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banich M. T. (2009). Executive function: the search for an integrated account. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18 89–94. 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01615.x - DOI
    1. Barch D. M., Berman M. G., Engle R., Jones J. H., Jonides J., MacDonald A. I., et al. (2009). CNTRICS final task selection: working memory. Schizophr. Bull. 35 136–152. 10.1093/schbul/sbn153 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barch D. M., Carter C. S., Braver T. S., Sabb F. W., MacDonald A., Noll D. C., et al. (2001). Selective deficits in prefrontal cortex function in medication-naive patients with schizophrenia. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 58 280–288. 10.1001/archpsyc.58.3.280 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barch D. M., Carter C. S., MacDonald A. W., Braver T. S., Cohen J. D. (2003). Context-processing deficits in schizophrenia: diagnostic specificity, 4-week course, and relationships to clinical symptoms. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 112 132–143. 10.1037/0021-843X.112.1.132 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback