Neural Circuitry Underlying Rule Use in Humans and Nonhuman Primates: Figure 1.

Bunge, Silvia A.; Wallis, Jonathan D.; Parker, Amanda; Braß, Marcel; Crone, Eveline A.; Hoshi, Eiji; Sakai, Katsuyuki

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2937-05.2005

Cited by 110 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(49 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed below, the combination of results presented here and in the literature suggests that the dACC/msFC and aI/fO ''core'' might in part support a basic domain-independent and externally directed ''task mode'' (5) in opposition to the brain's ''default mode'' (32), whereas the aPFC might provide more specific representations of plans, subgoals (39), rules (10,40), and/or strategies (31) for complex task paradigms. The cinguloopercular network we identified thus unifies a set of regions (aPFC, dACC/msFC, aI/fO) individually associated with different executive functions, such as rule maintenance (40) and performance monitoring (41).…”

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…The cinguloopercular network we identified thus unifies a set of regions (aPFC, dACC/msFC, aI/fO) individually associated with different executive functions, such as rule maintenance (40) and performance monitoring (41). Although previously debated (1,11), recent studies in humans (2,35,(42)(43)(44) and macaques (45,46) have demonstrated preparatory and maintenance control signals in the dACC/msFC, indicating that the dACC/msFC actively exerts top-down control over sensory (47) and limbic brain regions (48).…”

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The aI/fO, sometimes labeled ventrolateral prefrontal cortex or anterior ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, has been present in several imaging experiments that measured control signals (10,40,50). Important studies in humans and nonhuman primates have implicated the aI/fO in the representation of task rules (8,49).…”

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans

Dosenbach¹,

Fair

Miezin

et al. 2007

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

2,380

185

2,165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Control regions in the brain are thought to provide signals that configure the brain's moment-to-moment information processing. Previously, we identified regions that carried signals related to taskcontrol initiation, maintenance, and adjustment. Here we characterize the interactions of these regions by applying graph theory to resting state functional connectivity MRI data. In contrast to previous, more unitary models of control, this approach suggests the presence of two distinct task-control networks. A frontoparietal network included the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and intraparietal sulcus. This network emphasized start-cue and error-related activity and may initiate and adapt control on a trial-by-trial basis. The second network included dorsal anterior cingulate/medial superior frontal cortex, anterior insula/frontal operculum, and anterior prefrontal cortex. Among other signals, these regions showed activity sustained across the entire task epoch, suggesting that this network may control goaldirected behavior through the stable maintenance of task sets. These two independent networks appear to operate on different time scales and affect downstream processing via dissociable mechanisms.attention ͉ connectivity ͉ executive control ͉ functional MRI ͉ task set H umans possess unrivaled cognitive flexibility. When performing goal-directed tasks, humans are thought to adopt task sets that flexibly configure information processing in response to changing task demands. The brain's task-control system is thought to consist of functionally diverse regions that are anatomically separate from downstream processing systems (1).Previously, we studied mixed blocked/event-related fMRI data across a wide range of tasks (2). Because mixed fMRI designs can disambiguate sustained set-maintenance activity from more transient set and trial-related activity (3, 4), we were able to identify regions that carried three different putative task-control signals: (i) activity time-locked to the beginning of task periods (control initiation), (ii) set-maintenance signals sustained across the entire task period, and (iii) error-related activity (for feedback and control adjustment). Using cross-studies analyses, we identified a collection of regions thought to support these various task-control signals.The dorsal anterior cingulate cortex/medial superior frontal cortex (dACC/msFC) and bilateral anterior insula/frontal operculum (aI/fO) were the only regions that showed all three task-control signals (set initiation, maintenance, and feedback and adjustment) across a wide range of tasks. Therefore, we proposed that the dACC/msFC and aI/fO might

show abstract

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Cinguloopercular Network: Stable Maintenance Of Task Mode Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans

Dosenbach¹,

Fair

Miezin

et al. 2007

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

2,380

185

2,165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, although some studies (Wang et al, 2000;Bussey et al, 2001) have shown that lesioning ventral PFC after learning does not affect subse- quent rule use in monkeys, other studies, in which recording was from regions in the principal sulcus extending to DLPFC (BA 9/46), have supported the idea that this latter region controls the guidance of behavior according to well learned rules (White and Wise, 1999;Asaad et al, 2000;Mansouri et al, 2006). From this perspective, mid-DLPFC, as well as more posterior brain regions such as the IFJ and PMd, would mediate rule implementation by selecting and maintaining the appropriate response contingencies associated with the currently relevant task rules (Bunge, 2004;Brass et al, 2005;Bunge et al, 2005). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Mechanisms of Rule Acquisition and Rule Following in Inductive Reasoning

Crescentini¹,

Seyed-Allaei²,

Pisapia³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the recent interest in the neuroanatomy of inductive reasoning processes, the regional specificity within prefrontal cortex (PFC) for the different mechanisms involved in induction tasks remains to be determined. In this study, we used fMRI to investigate the contribution of PFC regions to rule acquisition (rule search and rule discovery) and rule following. Twenty-six healthy young adult participants were presented with a series of images of cards, each consisting of a set of circles numbered in sequence with one colored blue. Participants had to predict the position of the blue circle on the next card. The rules that had to be acquired pertained to the relationship among succeeding stimuli. Responses given by subjects were categorized in a series of phases either tapping rule acquisition (responses given up to and including rule discovery) or rule following (correct responses after rule acquisition). Mid-dorsolateral PFC (mid-DLPFC) was active during rule search and remained active until successful rule acquisition. By contrast, rule following was associated with activation in temporal, motor, and medial/anterior prefrontal cortex. Moreover, frontopolar cortex (FPC) was active throughout the rule acquisition and rule following phases before a rule became familiar. We attributed activation in mid-DLPFC to hypothesis generation and in FPC to integration of multiple separate inferences. The present study provides evidence that brain activation during inductive reasoning involves a complex network of frontal processes and that different subregions respond during rule acquisition and rule following phases.

show abstract

“…However, orbitofrontal patients also lacked the anticipatory autonomic (SCR) responses observed in control subjects when they were choosing between two risky decks of cards These observations suggest that the orbitofrontal cortex may play a more significant role influencing emotion and autonomic state in gambling tasks than is so-far captured by the model. In particular, when patients gamble, they may rely on working memory to generate hypotheses about the consequences of different choices (Bunge, et al 2005;Grossberg and Pearson, 2007). It seems likely that the orbitofrontal cortex is needed for items being processed in working memory to acquire emotional relevance.…”

Section: Lesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural dynamics underlying impaired autonomic and conditioned responses following amygdala and orbitofrontal lesions.

Grossberg

Bullock

Dranias

2008

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A neural model is presented that explains how outcome-specific learning modulates affect, decision-making and Pavlovian conditioned approach responses. The model addresses how brain regions responsible for affective learning and habit learning interact, and answers a central question: What are the relative contributions of the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex to emotion and behavior? In the model, the amygdala calculates outcome value while the orbitofrontal cortex influences attention and conditioned responding by assigning value information to stimuli. Model simulations replicate autonomic, electrophysiological, and behavioral data associated with three tasks commonly used to assay these phenomena: Food consumption, Pavlovian conditioning, and visual discrimination. Interactions of the basal ganglia and amygdala with sensory and orbitofrontal cortices enable the model to replicate the complex pattern of spared and impaired behavioral and emotional capacities seen following lesions of the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex.

show abstract

Neural Circuitry Underlying Rule Use in Humans and Nonhuman Primates: Figure 1.

Cited by 110 publications

References 53 publications

Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans

Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans

Mechanisms of Rule Acquisition and Rule Following in Inductive Reasoning

Neural dynamics underlying impaired autonomic and conditioned responses following amygdala and orbitofrontal lesions.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About