Is cognitive control automatic? New insights from transcranial magnetic stimulation

Cona, Giorgia; Treccani, Barbara; Umiltà, Carlo

doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1023-8

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies reported evidence for motor activity associated with sequential effects even if trials did not require a motor response (Cona, Treccani, & Umiltà, 2016). More specifically, these authors used TMS applied over M1 at 200 ms after stimulus presentation during a Go/No-go Simon task.…”

Section: Tms and Key Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They found that MEP activity was modulated by sequential effects even if the participant knew in advance that the upcoming trial would be a no-go trial. In light of this evidence, Cona, Treccani and Umiltà (2016) concluded that cognitive control may be automatically implemented and cannot only operate without awareness of the conflict but also without an intention to select a response (Desender & Van den Bussche, 2012;van Gaal, Lamme, & Ridderinkhof, 2010). Also, these results could be explained because integration of the stimulus features does not require intention to select a response.…”

Section: Tms and Key Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The neurocognitive underpinnings of the Simon effect: An integrative review of current research

Cespón

Hommel

Korsch

et al. 2020

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For as long as half a century the Simon taskin which participants respond to a nonspatial stimulus feature while ignoring its positionhas represented a very popular tool to study a variety of cognitive functions, such as attention, cognitive control, and response preparation processes. In particular, the task generates two theoretically interesting effects: the Simon effect proper and the sequential modulations of this effect. In the present study, we review the main theoretical explanations of both kinds of effects and the available neuroscientific studies that investigated the neural underpinnings of the cognitive processes underlying the Simon effect proper and its sequential modulation using electroencephalogram (EEG) and event-related brain potentials (ERP), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Then, we relate the neurophysiological findings to the main theoretical accounts and evaluate their validity and empirical plausibility, including general implications related to processing interference and cognitive control. Overall, neurophysiological research supports claims that stimulus location triggers the creation of a spatial code, which activates a spatially compatible response that, in incompatible conditions, interferes with the response based on the task instructions. Integration of stimulus-response features plays a major role in the occurrence of the Simon effect (which is manifested in the selection of the response) and its modulation by sequential congruency effects. Additional neural mechanisms are involved in supporting the correct and inhibiting the incorrect response.

show abstract

Section: Tms and Key Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tms and Key Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neurocognitive underpinnings of the Simon effect: An integrative review of current research

Cespón

Hommel

Korsch

et al. 2020

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a response conflict task, such as the flanker task, suppression of irrelevant and conflicting response information is typically more efficient on the trial after an individual has successfully resolved such conflict (Botvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter, & Cohen, 2001;Gratton, Coles, & Donchin, 1992). Such conflict adaptation effects are evident in motor-evoked potentials even when the prior and current trials required no behavioral response, and thus when no conflict in response selection required resolution, consistent with the idea that the response associations of the stimuli (which were arbitrary and defined by the task goals) were processed automatically in a cue-driven fashion (Cona, Treccani, & Umiltà, 2016).…”

Section: Flexibility Of Automatic Information Processingmentioning

confidence: 61%

Controlled information processing, automaticity, and the burden of proof

Anderson

2017

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive psychologists often distinguish between voluntary and involuntary/automatic processes in attention and cognitive control. Dedicated experimental paradigms have been developed to isolate involuntary information processing, but these paradigms tend to assume a rigid and inflexible process that is either stimulus-driven or built up through simple repetition. In contrast, voluntary information processing is often assumed when processing is in line with arbitrarily defined task-specific goals. Here I review evidence from multiple cases suggesting that ostensibly goal-directed cognitive processes may not be so voluntary and controlled. It is argued that automatic processes can be conditionalized to reflect the task relevance of the stimuli and selection history in a variety of ways, rapidly and flexibly adjusting in order to facilitate future goal-directed behavior. As a result, many studies assumed to have measured a voluntary cognitive process have likely measured an amalgam of voluntary and automatic processes, thus blurring the distinction between the two. Automaticity may be much broader and more sophisticated than has previously been thought, which has wide-reaching implications for our conception of human cognitive control.

show abstract

“…Yet, participants also carried out a detection task in which arrow targets pointing left or right were used, to test another hypothesis. It has been shown that response conflict is detected by the brain, even when participants simply view the screen without responding 48 . Thus, it could be that participants also have an experience of subjective difficulty during the detection task based on the mismatch between prime and arrow target, even though they do not respond to the targets.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjective experience of difficulty depends on multiple cues

Desender

Opstal

Bussche

2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human cognition is characterized by subjective experiences that go along with our actions, but the nature and stability of these experiences remain largely unclear. In the current report, the subjective experience of difficulty is studied and it is proposed that this experience is constructed by integrating information from multiple cues. Such an account can explain the tight relationship between primary task performance and subjective difficulty, while allowing for dissociations between both to occur. Confirming this hypothesis, response conflict, reaction time and response repetition were identified as variables that contribute to the experience of difficulty. Trials that were congruent, fast or required the same response as the previous trial were more frequently rated as easy than trials that were incongruent, slow or required a different response as the previous trial. Furthermore, in line with theoretical accounts that relate metacognition to learning, a three day training procedure showed that the influence of these variables on subjective difficulty judgments can be changed. Results of the current study are discussed in relation to work on meta-memory and to recent theoretical advancements in the understanding of subjective confidence.

show abstract

Is cognitive control automatic? New insights from transcranial magnetic stimulation

Cited by 9 publications

References 33 publications

The neurocognitive underpinnings of the Simon effect: An integrative review of current research

The neurocognitive underpinnings of the Simon effect: An integrative review of current research

Controlled information processing, automaticity, and the burden of proof

Subjective experience of difficulty depends on multiple cues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About