Spatio-temporal brain dynamics in a combined stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response conflict task

Unconscious context-specific proportion congruency effect in a stroop-like task

“…This interaction between percentage of congruency and congruency was obtained using an average and a mastoid reference. The P3 component has been associated with response conflict and reported to be more positive in incongruent compared to congruent trials (Clayson & Larson, 2011;Frünholz et al, 2011). Although this component has also been associated with conscious processing (Dehaene & Changeux, 2011), our results show that it may be affected by the unconscious processing of both the proportion of congruency and the congruency between the color word and the color of the target.…”

“…Both components have been associated with the operation of control structures such as the ACC and DLPFC (Frünholz et al, 2011;Ridderinkhof et al, 2004). It has been demonstrated that these structures play a role in conflict adaptation at a local item level (Blais & Bunge, 2010).…”

“…Consistent with the role of the ACC in the conflict-monitoring theory, the amplitude of this component has been found to be more negative in incompatible trials compared to compatible trials (Clayson & Larson, 2011;Wendt & Luna-Rodríguez, 2009). Moreover, the P3 component, a positive deflection in the averaged waveform with a central-parietal distribution that occurs 350-500 ms after stimulus presentation, has been associated with response conflict and has been found to be more positive in incongruent trials compared to congruent trials (Clayson & Larson, 2011;Frünholz, Godde, Finke, & Herrmann, 2011). Research conducted by Clayson and Larson (2011) is of particular interest for the present study.…”

Disentangling common and specific neural subprocesses of response inhibition

“…Stroop task) revealed increased activation mainly in pre-motor, thus more response related regions (Egner et al, 2007;Liu et al, 2004;Wendelken et al, 2009). Other studies have linked parietal activation to both, stimulus-response conflict (Frühholz et al, 2011;Wendelken et al, 2009) and to stimulus-stimulus conflict (Egner et al, 2007;Liu et al, 2004).…”

The neural dynamics of stimulus and response conflict processing as a function of response complexity and task demands

“…In the Flanker task, a negative-polarity component that is similar in distribution, often referred to as the N2, tends to occur slightly earlier in time (typically around 250 – 350 ms; Appelbaum et al, 2011; Bartholow et al, 2005; Danielmeier, Wessel, Steinhauser, & Ullsperger, 2009; Frühholz, Godde, Finke, & Herrmann, 2011; Tillman & Wiens, 2011). Although sources of these conflict-related negativities have been linked to activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC; Liotti et al, 2000; van Veen & Carter, 2002b), it is not at all clear if the N450 and the N2 reflect different processes or are the same process occurring at slightly different time periods due to the nature of the task, or if they entail different subregions of the ACC or other brain areas and therefore potentially subserve fundamentally different mechanisms (Folstein & Van Petten, 2008).…”