Resolving Conflict: a Response to Martin and Cheng (2006)

Overview

Journal Psychon Bull Rev

Specialty Psychology

Date 2006 Oct 20

PMID 17048722

Citations 30

Authors

Sharon L Thompson-Schill

Matthew M Botvinick

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Martin and Cheng (2006) report the results of an experiment aimed at disentangling the effects of association strength from those of competition on performance on a verb generation task. Their experiment is situated at the center of a putative debate regarding the function of the left inferior frontal gyrus in language processing (see, e.g., Wagner, Pard-Blagoev, Clark, and Poldrack, 2001). Following in this tradition, Martin and Cheng purport to contrast two processes--selection between competing representations and controlled retrieval of weak associates--that we argue can be reduced to the same mechanism. We contend that the distinction between competition and association strength is a false dichotomy, and we attempt to recast this discussion within a Bayesian framework in an attempt to guide research in this area in a more fruitful direction.

Citing Articles

A narrative review of the anatomy and function of the white matter tracts in language production and comprehension.

Shekari E, Nozari N Front Hum Neurosci. 2023; 17:1139292.

PMID: 37051488 PMC: 10083342. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1139292.

Selection Processing in Noun and Verb Production in Left- and Right-Sided Parkinson's Disease Patients.

Di Tella S, Baglio F, Cabinio M, Nemni R, Traficante D, Silveri M Front Psychol. 2018; 9:1241.

PMID: 30079043 PMC: 6062671. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01241.

Network Controllability in the Inferior Frontal Gyrus Relates to Controlled Language Variability and Susceptibility to TMS.

Medaglia J, Harvey D, White N, Kelkar A, Zimmerman J, Bassett D J Neurosci. 2018; 38(28):6399-6410.

PMID: 29884739 PMC: 6041793. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0092-17.2018.

Strength of Temporal White Matter Pathways Predicts Semantic Learning.

Ripolles P, Biel D, Penaloza C, Kaufmann J, Marco-Pallares J, Noesselt T J Neurosci. 2017; 37(46):11101-11113.

PMID: 29025925 PMC: 6596806. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1720-17.2017.

Semantic interference and its control: A functional neuroimaging and connectivity study.

Canini M, Della Rosa P, Catricala E, Strijkers K, Branzi F, Costa A Hum Brain Mapp. 2016; 37(11):4179-4196.

PMID: 27355179 PMC: 6867558. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23304.

References

Thompson-Schill S, Bedny M, Goldberg R . The frontal lobes and the regulation of mental activity. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2005; 15(2):219-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2005.03.006. View

Shadlen M, Newsome W . Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the rhesus monkey. J Neurophysiol. 2001; 86(4):1916-36. DOI: 10.1152/jn.2001.86.4.1916. View

Badre D, Poldrack R, Pare-Blagoev E, Insler R, Wagner A . Dissociable controlled retrieval and generalized selection mechanisms in ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. Neuron. 2005; 47(6):907-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.07.023. View

DeSimone R, Duncan J . Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1995; 18:193-222. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205. View

Wagner A, Clark J, Poldrack R . Recovering meaning: left prefrontal cortex guides controlled semantic retrieval. Neuron. 2001; 31(2):329-38. DOI: 10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00359-2. View

Robinson G, Blair J, Cipolotti L . Dynamic aphasia: an inability to select between competing verbal responses?. Brain. 1998; 121 ( Pt 1):77-89. DOI: 10.1093/brain/121.1.77. View

Martin R, Cheng Y . Selection demands versus association strength in the verb generation task. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006; 13(3):396-401. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193859. View

Usher M, McClelland J . The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108(3):550-92. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.550. View

MURDOCK Jr B . An analysis of the strength-latency relationship. Mem Cognit. 1985; 13(6):511-21. DOI: 10.3758/bf03198322. View

10.

Nelson D, Dyrdal G, Goodmon L . What is preexisting strength? Predicting free association probabilities, similarity ratings, and cued recall probabilities. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006; 12(4):711-9. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196762. View

11.

Gold J, Shadlen M . Neural computations that underlie decisions about sensory stimuli. Trends Cogn Sci. 2001; 5(1):10-16. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01567-9. View

12.

Botvinick M, Braver T, Barch D, Carter C, Cohen J . Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108(3):624-52. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624. View

13.

Hamilton A, Martin R . Dissociations among tasks involving inhibition: a single-case study. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005; 5(1):1-13. DOI: 10.3758/cabn.5.1.1. View

14.

Usher M, Cohen J, Servan-Schreiber D, Rajkowski J, Aston-Jones G . The role of locus coeruleus in the regulation of cognitive performance. Science. 1999; 283(5401):549-54. DOI: 10.1126/science.283.5401.549. View

15.

DEsposito M, Kan I . Effects of repetition and competition on activity in left prefrontal cortex during word generation. Neuron. 1999; 23(3):513-22. DOI: 10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80804-1. View

16.

Swick D, Farah M, DEsposito M, Kan I, Knight R . Verb generation in patients with focal frontal lesions: a neuropsychological test of neuroimaging findings. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95(26):15855-60. PMC: 28134. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.26.15855. View

17.

DEsposito M, Aguirre G, Farah M . Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: a reevaluation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 94(26):14792-7. PMC: 25116. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.94.26.14792. View

18.

Vigliocco G, Vinson D, Damian M, Levelt W . Semantic distance effects on object and action naming. Cognition. 2002; 85(3):B61-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00107-5. View

19.

Pouget A, Dayan P, Zemel R . Inference and computation with population codes. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2003; 26:381-410. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.26.041002.131112. View

20.

Kan I, Thompson-Schill S . Selection from perceptual and conceptual representations. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005; 4(4):466-82. DOI: 10.3758/cabn.4.4.466. View