Dual Mechanisms Of Cognitive Control Research Articles

Working memory capacity preferentially enhances implementation of proactive control.

Previous research has linked working memory capacity (WMC) with enhanced proactive control. However, it remains unclear the extent to which this relationship reflects the influence of WMC on the tendency to engage proactive control, or rather, the ability to implement it. The current study sought to clarify this ambiguity by leveraging the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) version of the AX-CPT task, in which the mode of cognitive control is experimentally manipulated across distinct testing sessions. To adjudicate between competing hypotheses, Bayesian mixed modeling was used to conduct sequential analyses involving two separate data sets. Posterior parameter estimates obtained from the initial analysis were entered as informed priors during the replication analysis to evaluate the influence of new data on previous estimates. Results yielded strong evidence demonstrating that the influence of WMC on proactive control is most robust under experimentally controlled conditions, during which use of proactive control is standardized across participants via explicit training and instruction. Critically, the observed pattern of findings suggests that the relationship between WMC and proactive control may be better characterized as individual differences in the ability to implement proactive control, rather than a more generalized tendency to engage it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

On the psychometric evaluation of cognitive control tasks: An Investigation with the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) battery

The domain of cognitive control has been a major focus of experimental, neuroscience, and individual differences research. Currently, however, no theory of cognitive control successfully unifies both experimental and individual differences findings. Some perspectives deny that there even exists a unified psychometric cognitive control construct to be measured at all. These shortcomings of the current literature may reflect the fact that current cognitive control paradigms are optimized for the detection of within-subject experimental effects rather than individual differences. In the current study, we examine the psychometric properties of the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) task battery, which was designed in accordance with a theoretical framework that postulates common sources of within-subject and individual differences variation. We evaluated both internal consistency and test–retest reliability, and for the latter, utilized both classical test theory measures (i.e., split-half methods, intraclass correlation) and newer hierarchical Bayesian estimation of generative models. Although traditional psychometric measures suggested poor reliability, the hierarchical Bayesian models indicated a different pattern, with good to excellent test–retest reliability in almost all tasks and conditions examined. Moreover, within-task, between-condition correlations were generally increased when using the Bayesian model-derived estimates, and these higher correlations appeared to be directly linked to the higher reliability of the measures. In contrast, between-task correlations remained low regardless of theoretical manipulations or estimation approach. Together, these findings highlight the advantages of Bayesian estimation methods, while also pointing to the important role of reliability in the search for a unified theory of cognitive control.

The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) project: Validation of an online behavioural task battery.

Cognitive control serves a crucial role in human higher mental functions. The Dual Mechanisms of Control theoretical framework provides a unifying account that decomposes cognitive control into two qualitatively distinct mechanisms-proactive control and reactive control. Here, we describe the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) task battery, which was developed to probe cognitive control modes in a theoretically targeted manner, along with detailed descriptions of the experimental manipulations used to encourage shifts to proactive or reactive mode in each of four prototypical domains of cognition: selective attention, context processing, multitasking, and working memory. We present results from this task battery, conducted from a large (N > 100), online sample that rigorously evaluates the group effects of these manipulations in primary indices of proactive and reactive control, establishing the validity of the battery in providing dissociable yet convergent measures of the two cognitive control modes. The DMCC battery may be a useful tool for the research community to examine cognitive control in a theoretically targeted manner across different individuals and groups.

Working memory capacity and dual mechanisms of cognitive control: An experimental-correlational approach.

Working memory is thought to be strongly related to cognitive control. Recent studies have sought to understand this relationship under the prism of the dual mechanisms of control (DMC) framework, in which cognitive control is thought to operate in two distinct modes: proactive and reactive. Several authors have concluded that a high working memory capacity is associated with a tendency to engage the more effective mechanism of proactive control. However, the predicted pattern of proactive control use has never been observed; correlational evidence is made difficult to interpret by the overall superiority of participants with a high working memory capacity: they tend to perform better even when proactive control should be detrimental. In two experiments, we used an experimental-correlational approach to experimentally induce the use of reactive or proactive control in the AX-CPT. The relation between working memory capacity and performance was unaffected, incompatible with the hypothesis that the better performance of participants with a high working memory capacity in the task is due to their use of proactive control. It remains unclear how individual differences in working memory capacity relate to cognitive control under the DMC framework.

The dual mechanisms of cognitive control and their relation to reasoning and the item-position effect

Braver's (2012) dual mechanisms of cognitive control differentiate between proactive control (PMC; i.e. early selection and maintenance of goal-relevant information) and reactive control (RMC; i.e. a late mobilization of attention when required). It has been suggested that higher cognitive capacities (as indicated by reasoning ability as a major characteristic of fluid intelligence) facilitate using the more resource-demanding PMC. We propose the following alternative explanation: engagement in PMC during the completion of reasoning tests leads to better test performance because gained knowledge (i.e. rules learned) during completion of early items is better maintained and transferred to later items. This learning of rules during the completion of a reasoning test results in an item-position effect (IPE) as an additional source of individual differences besides reasoning ability. We investigated this idea in a sample of 210 young adults who completed the AX-Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT) and the Vienna Matrices Test (VMT). Using fixed-links modeling, we separated an IPE from reasoning ability in the VMT. Based on reaction time (RT) patterns across AX-CPT conditions, we identified three different groups by means of latent-profile analysis. RT patterns indicated engagement in PMC for Group A, mixed PMC and RMC for Group B, and RMC for Group C. With the consideration of the IPE, groups did not differ in their reasoning abilities. However, Group A (engaging in PMC) had a more pronounced IPE than Group C (engaging in RMC). Therefore, we conclude that PMC contributes to a stronger IPE, which in turn leads to higher scores in reasoning tests as measures of fluid intelligence.

Dissociation of Proactive and Reactive Cognitive Control in Individuals with Schizotypy: An Event-Related Potential Study.

Patients with schizophrenia and individuals with schizotypy, a subclinical group at risk for schizophrenia, have been found to have impairments in cognitive control. The Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMC) framework hypothesises that cognitive control can be divided into proactive and reactive control. However, it is unclear whether individuals with schizotypy have differential behavioural impairments and neural correlates underlying these two types of cognitive control. Twenty-five individuals with schizotypy and 26 matched healthy controls (HCs) completed both reactive and proactive control tasks with electroencephalographic data recorded. The proportion of congruent and incongruent trials was manipulated in a classic colour-word Stroop task to induce proactive or reactive control. Proactive control was induced in a context with mostly incongruent (MI) trials and reactive control in a context with mostly congruent (MC) trials. Two event-related potential (ERP) components, medial frontal negativity (MFN, associated with conflict detection) and conflict sustained potential (conflict SP, associated with conflict resolution) were examined. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of behavioural results. In terms of ERP results, in the MC context, HC exhibited significantly larger MFN (360-530 ms) and conflict SP (600-1000 ms) amplitudes than individuals with schizotypy. The two groups did not show any significant difference in MFN or conflict SP in the MI context. The present findings provide initial evidence for dissociation of neural activation between proactive and reactive cognitive control in individuals with schizotypy. These findings help us understand cognitive control deficits in the schizophrenia spectrum.

Dual mechanisms of cognitive control in mindful individuals.

Not much research has adopted a multicomponent approach to examine the relationship between mindfulness and cognitive control. Studies addressing this issue have produced mixed results that may be due to the incorporation of different questionnaires to assess mindfulness and to the assessment of different stages and types of mindfulness itself. In the present study, we aimed to investigate to which extent dispositional mindfulness relates to a dynamic use of control modes as understood from the dual mechanisms of control theory. Further, we aimed to test this hypothesis by including two different frequently used mindfulness questionnaires in order to explore their confluence. Hundred thirty young adults completed two well-established assessment tools of mindfulness (Mindful Attention Awareness Scale and Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire) and two well-validated experimental tasks measuring proactive/reactive control modes (AX-Continuous Performance Task and Cued Task-Switching Paradigm). The data analyses were performed considering the continuous values in multiple regression analyses, as it is thought to better capture individual differences. The results replicate the previous findings suggesting that mindful individuals tend to use proactive and reactive control in a balanced manner in comparison to low mindfulness individuals, who tend to rely more on proactive control. Moreover, mindful individuals showed greater flexibility when the two processing modes were available. Hence, the major effects were found by using the two questionnaires. Altogether our findings indicate that mindful individuals, who have been characterized by an enhanced focus on the present moment without judgment, are less attached to the previous contextual information, which allows them to exhibit a more flexible performance.

Social exclusion modulates dual mechanisms of cognitive control: Evidence from ERPs.

Many studies have investigated how social exclusion influences cognitive control but reported inconsistent findings. Based on the dual mechanisms of control framework, this study investigated how social exclusion influences proactive and reactive modes of control (Experiment 1) and the underlying mechanisms (Experiment 2). The Cyberball game was used to manipulate social exclusion. Eighty‐six female participants (about 40 for each experiment) performed cognitive control tasks while event‐related potentials were recorded. In Experiment 1, an AX Continuous Performance Task (AX‐CPT) was adopted to differentiate between proactive and reactive control. Results showed that social exclusion weakened proactive control but enhanced reactive control, as reflected by the weaker proactive control indicators (i.e., P3b and CNV), but strengthened reactive control indicators (accuracy and N2) in excluded individuals. More importantly, in Experiment 2, through varying in whether task cues were available before or after target onset in a cued‐flanker task, we further manipulated the possibility of engaging proactive control, and found the weakened proactive control could be attributed to both impaired cognitive ability and lowered motivation to engage proactive control in excluded individuals. Together, these results provide insight on how social exclusion influences cognitive control and suggest promising implications for designing effective interventions to relieve the negative impact of social exclusion.

Processing linguistic variation through dual mechanisms of cognitive control

AbstractWhile rarely difficult for the average speaker/listener, the ubiquity of variation at all levels of linguistic production is a challenge for modern psycholinguistic models of language processing. Variation is perhaps most extreme at the levels of phonetics and phonology, but many models of language processing all but eschew these levels altogether. The current paper posits that cognitive control mechanisms, when divided into proactive and reactive control via a dual mechanisms framework may effectively describe the strategies individuals use to process linguistic variation and, when incorporated into language processing models, can generate novel, testable predictions regarding the origin and propagation of individual differences. By means of example, I illustrate how dual mechanisms of control could be incorporated into a connectionist model of language production. I then describe how dual mechanisms of cognitive control might be relevant for the Adaptive Control Hypothesis and how individual differences in processing strategies may modulate participation in language changes-in-progress.

Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and dual mechanisms of cognitive control: A tDCS study

Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and dual mechanisms of cognitive control: A tDCS study

Bilingualism modulates dual mechanisms of cognitive control: Evidence from ERPs

Recent behavioral findings with the AX-Continous Performance Task (AX-CPT; Morales et al., 2013) show that bilinguals only outperform monolinguals under conditions that require the highest adjustment between monitoring (proactive) and inhibitory (reactive) control, which supports the idea that bilingualism modulates the coordination of different control mechanisms. In an ERP experiment we aimed to further investigate the role that bilingualism plays in the dynamic combination of proactive and reactive control in the AX-CPT. Our results strongly indicate that bilingualism facilitates an effective adjustment between both components of cognitive control. First, we replicated previous behavioral results. Second, ERP components indicated that bilingualism influences the conflict monitoring, response inhibition and error monitoring components of control (as indexed by the N2 and P3a elicited by the probe and the error-related negativity following incorrect responses, respectively). Thus, bilinguals exerted higher reactive control than monolinguals but only when they needed to overcome the competing cue-information. These findings join others in suggesting that a better understanding of the cognitive benefits of bilingualism may require consideration of a multi-component perspective.

Dual mechanisms of cognitive control in bilinguals and monolinguals

Growing evidence shows that executive functioning benefits from bilingual experience. However, the nature of the mechanisms underlying this advantage remains to be clarified. Whereas some have put forward single process accounts to explain the superior performance of bilinguals relative to monolinguals in executive control tasks, recent findings have been interpreted by considering the dynamic combination of monitoring and inhibitory processes to overcome interference from distractor information. In the present study we explored this idea by comparing monolinguals and highly proficient bilinguals in the AX-CPT. This task requires individuals to adjust proactive (monitoring) and reactive (inhibition) control to achieve efficient performance. We also examined the extent to which a well-known index of inhibitory capacity, the stop-signal reaction time, predicts accuracy in the AX-CPT. Results showed that bilinguals outperformed monolinguals in the experimental condition where higher requirement of proactive-reactive control adjustment was required. Interestingly, the inhibition index predicted errors in this condition only in the sample of bilinguals. These findings suggest that a better understanding of the cognitive benefits of bilingualism may require consideration of how bilinguals adjust different executive control mechanisms to cope with interference.

Contextual modulation of oculomotor control reflected in N2 and saccade reaction time distributions

Avoiding reflexive saccades triggered by salient yet task-irrelevant stimuli requires the engagement of control processes that inhibit attention toward irrelevant objects and prevent reflex-like oculomotor action. In the current study participants made saccades to visual targets to the left and right of fixation as directed by target appearance. A distractor could either be presented in the same (congruent trials) or the opposite hemifield (incongruent trials) as the target. Trial context was manipulated, creating risky (mostly incongruent blocks), safe (mostly congruent blocks), or neutral conditions. Electroencephalogram was measured to examine if any contextual modulations would be reflected in the N2 peak frequently associated with performance monitoring. The results are discussed within the framework of dual mechanisms of cognitive control and suggest that a high-risk context facilitates avoidance of capture, lessening the need for reactive control.

Reactive and proactive control in incarcerated and community adolescents and young adults

This study compared the cognitive control skills of male incarcerated adolescents ( n = 44), male control adolescents ( n = 33), male incarcerated young adults ( n = 41), and male control young adults ( n = 35) using the AX-continuous performance test (AX-CPT). This test measures proactive control (the ability to maintain a mental representation of goal-related information in preparation for a behavioral response) and reactive control (the ability to activate goal-related information in response to an external trigger). Incarcerated individuals had more difficulty implementing proactive control, whereas control individuals had more difficulty implementing reactive control. Adolescents had more difficulty with both reactive and proactive control compared with young adults, suggesting that both skills improve with age. Additional analyses indicated that the effect of age on proactive control was due to the presence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, whereas the effect of age on reactive control appeared to be a natural developmental trend that could not be explained by other variables. These findings are considered in relation to the dual mechanisms of control theory [Braver, T. S., Gray, J. R., & Burgess, G. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake, & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in Working Memory. New York: Oxford University Press.].

A model of dual control mechanisms through anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex interactions

A computational model is presented that describes dual mechanisms of cognitive control through interactions between the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). One mechanism, reactive control, consists in the transient activation of PFC, based on conflict detected in ACC over a short time-scale. The second mechanism, proactive control, consists in the sustained active maintenance of task-set information in a separate PFC module, driven by long time-scale conflict detected in a separate ACC unit. The computational function of the first mechanism is to suppress the activation of task-irrelevant information just prior to when it could interfere with responding. The role of the second mechanism is to prime task-relevant processing pathways prior to stimulus-onset, in a preparatory fashion. The model provided an excellent fit to both the behavioral and brain imaging data from a previous detailed empirical study on humans performing the color-word version of the Stroop task. The model captured changes in reaction times across conditions, accuracy, and transient and sustained activity dynamics within lateral PFC and ACC.