Control of Response Interference: Caudate Nucleus Contributes to Selective Inhibition

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2020 Dec 2

PMID 33262369

Citations 14

Authors

Claudia C Schmidt

David C Timpert

Isabel Arend

Simone Vossel

Gereon R Fink

Avishai Henik

Peter H Weiss

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

While the role of cortical regions in cognitive control processes is well accepted, the contribution of subcortical structures (e.g., the striatum), especially to the control of response interference, remains controversial. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the cortical and particularly subcortical neural mechanisms of response interference control (including selective inhibition). Thirteen healthy young participants underwent event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging while performing a unimanual version of the Simon task. In this task, successful performance required the resolution of stimulus-response conflicts in incongruent trials by selectively inhibiting interfering response tendencies. The behavioral results show an asymmetrical Simon effect that was more pronounced in the contralateral hemifield. Contrasting incongruent trials with congruent trials (i.e., the overall Simon effect) significantly activated clusters in the right anterior cingulate cortex, the right posterior insula, and the caudate nucleus bilaterally. Furthermore, a region of interest analysis based on previous patient studies revealed that activation in the bilateral caudate nucleus significantly co-varied with a parameter of selective inhibition derived from distributional analyses of response times. Our results corroborate the notion that the cognitive control of response interference is supported by a fronto-striatal circuitry, with a functional contribution of the caudate nucleus to the selective inhibition of interfering response tendencies.

Citing Articles

Pre-choice midbrain fluctuations affect self-control in food choice: A functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study.

Skalbania J, Tanajewski L, Furtak M, Hare T, Wypych M Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2024; 25(2):387-401.

PMID: 39379768 PMC: 11906498. DOI: 10.3758/s13415-024-01231-7.

Neural underpinnings of ethical decisions in life and death dilemmas in naïve and expert firefighters.

Duarte I, Dionisio A, Oliveira J, Simoes M, Correia R, Dias J Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):13222.

PMID: 38851794 PMC: 11162493. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-63469-y.

The yes-no reversal phenomenon in patients with primary progressive apraxia of speech.

Meade G, Pham N, Schwarz C, Clark H, Duffy J, Senjem M Cortex. 2024; 177:28-36.

PMID: 38833818 PMC: 11893009. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2024.04.008.

Success versus failure in cognitive control: Meta-analytic evidence from neuroimaging studies on error processing.

Cieslik E, Ullsperger M, Gell M, Eickhoff S, Langner R Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2023; 156:105468.

PMID: 37979735 PMC: 10976187. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105468.

A Multilevel Examination of Cognitive Control in Adolescents With Nonsuicidal Self-injury.

Basgoze Z, Demers L, Thai M, Falke C, Mueller B, Fiecas M Biol Psychiatry Glob Open Sci. 2023; 3(4):855-866.

PMID: 37881532 PMC: 10593942. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpsgos.2023.04.005.

References

Dosenbach N, Fair D, Miezin F, Cohen A, Wenger K, Dosenbach R . Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(26):11073-8. PMC: 1904171. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0704320104. View

Arend I, Weiss P, Timpert D, Fink G, Henik A . Spatial Coding as a Function of Handedness and Responding Hand: Theoretical and Methodological Implications. PLoS One. 2016; 11(3):e0151979. PMC: 4816529. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151979. View

Cools R, Ivry R, DEsposito M . The human striatum is necessary for responding to changes in stimulus relevance. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006; 18(12):1973-83. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.12.1973. View

Medford N, Critchley H . Conjoint activity of anterior insular and anterior cingulate cortex: awareness and response. Brain Struct Funct. 2010; 214(5-6):535-49. PMC: 2886906. DOI: 10.1007/s00429-010-0265-x. View

Hubner R, Tobel L . Conflict resolution in the Eriksen flanker task: Similarities and differences to the Simon task. PLoS One. 2019; 14(3):e0214203. PMC: 6438467. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214203. View

Jahfari S, Waldorp L, van den Wildenberg W, Scholte H, Ridderinkhof K, Forstmann B . Effective connectivity reveals important roles for both the hyperdirect (fronto-subthalamic) and the indirect (fronto-striatal-pallidal) fronto-basal ganglia pathways during response inhibition. J Neurosci. 2011; 31(18):6891-9. PMC: 6632844. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5253-10.2011. View

Simon J . Reactions toward the source of stimulation. J Exp Psychol. 1969; 81(1):174-6. DOI: 10.1037/h0027448. View

Nee D, Wager T, Jonides J . Interference resolution: insights from a meta-analysis of neuroimaging tasks. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2007; 7(1):1-17. DOI: 10.3758/cabn.7.1.1. View

Sebastian A, Pohl M, Kloppel S, Feige B, Lange T, Stahl C . Disentangling common and specific neural subprocesses of response inhibition. Neuroimage. 2012; 64:601-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.020. View

10.

Goghari V, MacDonald 3rd A . Effects of varying the experimental design of a cognitive control paradigm on behavioral and functional imaging outcome measures. J Cogn Neurosci. 2007; 20(1):20-35. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20007. View

11.

Miller J, Rouast N . Dissociations of spatial congruence effects across response measures: an examination of delta plots. Psychol Res. 2015; 80(5):805-20. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-015-0694-5. View

12.

Cyr M, Yang X, Horga G, Marsh R . Abnormal fronto-striatal activation as a marker of threshold and subthreshold Bulimia Nervosa. Hum Brain Mapp. 2018; 39(4):1796-1804. PMC: 5847471. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23955. View

13.

Weidler B, Abrams R . Enhanced cognitive control near the hands. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013; 21(2):462-9. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-013-0514-0. View

14.

Nigg J . On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychol Bull. 2000; 126(2):220-46. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.220. View

15.

Sylvester C, Wager T, Lacey S, Hernandez L, Nichols T, Smith E . Switching attention and resolving interference: fMRI measures of executive functions. Neuropsychologia. 2002; 41(3):357-70. DOI: 10.1016/s0028-3932(02)00167-7. View

16.

Rubichi S, Nicoletti R . The Simon effect and handedness: evidence for a dominant-hand attentional bias in spatial coding. Percept Psychophys. 2007; 68(7):1059-69. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193709. View

17.

Hedge A, Marsh N . The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1975; 39(6):427-39. DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(75)90041-4. View

18.

Forman S, Cohen J, Fitzgerald M, Eddy W, Mintun M, Noll D . Improved assessment of significant activation in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI): use of a cluster-size threshold. Magn Reson Med. 1995; 33(5):636-47. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910330508. View

19.

Li Q, Yang G, Li Z, Qi Y, Cole M, Liu X . Conflict detection and resolution rely on a combination of common and distinct cognitive control networks. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017; 83:123-131. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.09.032. View

20.

Tagliabue M, Vidotto G, Umilta C, Altoe G, Treccani B, Spera P . The measurement of left-right asymmetries in the Simon effect: a fine-grained analysis. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39(1):50-61. DOI: 10.3758/bf03192843. View