Abstract
Coordinating among the demands of the external environment and internal plans requires cognitive control supported by a fronto-parietal control network (FPCN). Evidence suggests that multiple control systems span the FPCN whose operations are poorly understood. Previously (Nee and D'Esposito, 2016; 2017), we detailed frontal dynamics that support control processing, but left open their role in broader cortical function. Here, I show that the FPCN consists of an external/present-oriented to internal/future-oriented cortical gradient extending outwardly from sensory-motor cortices. Areas at the ends of this gradient act in a segregative manner, exciting areas at the same level, but suppressing areas at different levels. By contrast, areas in the middle of the gradient excite areas at all levels, promoting integration of control processing. Individual differences in integrative dynamics predict higher level cognitive ability and amenability to neuromodulation. These data suggest that an intermediary zone within the FPCN underlies integrative processing that supports cognitive control.
Highlights
While habits rigidly link stimuli to actions, cognitive control enables flexible behavior that can adapt to present conditions, prevailing contexts, and future plans (Miller and Cohen, 2001; Logan and Gordon, 2001; Egner, 2017; Badre and Nee, 2018)
Two independent samples (n = 24, n = 25) completed a Comprehensive Control Task that independently manipulated demands on stimulus domain, sensory-motor control, contextual control, and temporal control. These processes can be classed along an external-internal continuum such that sensory-motor control acts upon the sensory environment, contextual control informs those actions based upon an internalized rule, and temporal control informs the rule based upon an additional internalized representation (Figure 1)
Functional mapping of the frontoparietal control network’ (FPCN) was established by contrasting multiple forms of control within a single paradigm
Summary
While habits rigidly link stimuli to actions, cognitive control enables flexible behavior that can adapt to present conditions, prevailing contexts, and future plans (Miller and Cohen, 2001; Logan and Gordon, 2001; Egner, 2017; Badre and Nee, 2018). The relationship between cognitive control and areas of the PFC and PPC is so ubiquitous that a co-active set of PFC-PPC areas is frequently termed the ‘frontoparietal control network’ (FPCN) (Vincent et al, 2008; Braga and Buckner, 2017; Yeo et al, 2011; Dixon et al, 2018; Murphy et al, 2020) Recognizing their involvement across a diverse array of tasks, a similar constellation of areas is referred to as the ’multiple demand network’ (Duncan and Owen, 2000; Duncan, 2010; Duncan, 2013). The integrative capacity of cognitive control is central to higher level cognition
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
