title: "Smart inhibition": electrophysiological evidence for the suppression of conflict-generating task rules during task switching.
abstract: A major challenge for task switching is maintaining a balance between high task readiness and effectively ignoring irrelevant task rules. This calls for finely tuned inhibition that targets only the source of interference without adversely influencing other task-related representations. The authors show that irrelevant task rules generating response conflict are inhibited, causing their inefficient execution on the next trial (indicating the presence of competitor rule suppression[CRS];Meiran, Hsieh, & Dimov, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36, 992-1002, 2010). To determine whether CRS influences task rules, rather than target stimuli or responses, the authors focused on the processing of the task cue before the target stimulus was presented and before the response could be chosen. As was predicted, CRS was found in the event-related potentials in two time windows during task cue processing. It was also found in three time windows after target presentation. Source localization analyses suggest the involvement of the right dorsal prefrontal cortex in all five time windows.
authors: Department of Psychology, Zlotowsky Center for Neuroscience, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. nmeiran@bgu.ac.il
authors: Nachshon
authors: N
authors: Meiran
authors: Shulan
authors: S
authors: Hsieh
authors: Chi-Chih
authors: CC
authors: Chang
references: Eur J Neurosci. 2008 Sep;28(5):1016-29
references: 18717737
references: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2009 Jun;9(2):202-15
references: 19403896
references: Psychophysiology. 2007 Jul;44(4):561-78
references: 17539921
references: Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(10):1514-28
references: 15989941
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2003 Jun;29(3):575-99
references: 12848327
references: Neuroimage. 2003 Dec;20(4):2322-42
references: 14683733
references: Percept Mot Skills. 2002 Jun;94(3 Pt 2):1168-76
references: 12186238
references: Psychophysiology. 2005 Jan;42(1):33-42
references: 15720579
references: Nat Neurosci. 2005 Dec;8(12):1784-90
references: 16286928
references: Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol. 2002;24 Suppl D:5-12
references: 12575463
references: Psychol Bull. 2010 Jul;136(4):601-26
references: 20565170
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 May;29(3):362-72
references: 12776747
references: Front Psychol. 2010 Jul 15;1:25
references: 21833196
references: Brain Res. 2006 Apr 21;1084(1):132-45
references: 16647689
references: Psychophysiology. 2000 Sep;37(5):614-25
references: 11037038
references: Psychophysiology. 2006 Jul;43(4):413-21
references: 16916438
references: Psychol Res. 2006 Jul;70(4):245-61
references: 16151720
references: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008 Mar;8(1):65-73
references: 18405047
references: Psychophysiology. 2005 Sep;42(5):540-54
references: 16176376
references: Psychophysiology. 2011 May;48(5):612-23
references: 20840196
references: Neuropsychologia. 2009 Mar;47(4):1160-72
references: 19350711
references: Neuroreport. 2002 Oct 28;13(15):1887-92
references: 12395085
references: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Jun;24(1):133-54
references: 15922166
references: Psychophysiology. 2005 Jul;42(4):428-39
references: 16008771
references: Psychophysiology. 2003 May;40(3):329-48
references: 12946108
references: Brain Res. 2006 Nov 22;1121(1):160-76
references: 17010947
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 Sep;26(5):1124-40
references: 11009248
references: Eur J Neurosci. 2010 Feb;31(4):754-60
references: 20141527
references: Brain Res. 2007 Jul 9;1157:56-65
references: 17544384
references: J Cogn Neurosci. 2002 Nov 15;14(8):1139-50
references: 12495521
references: Psychophysiology. 2008 Jul;45(4):588-601
references: 18282198
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Feb;17(1):1-14
references: 20081154
references: Psychophysiology. 1991 Mar;28(2):240-4
references: 1946890
references: Neuroimage. 2010 May 15;51(1):432-49
references: 20123028
references: Psychophysiology. 2003 Jul;40(4):572-85
references: 14570165
references: Psychophysiology. 2007 Jul;44(4):596-609
references: 17451492
references: Psychol Rev. 2004 Oct;111(4):931-959
references: 15482068
references: Mem Cognit. 2005 Oct;33(7):1272-88
references: 16532859
references: Cogn Psychol. 2007 Aug;55(1):37-85
references: 17078941
references: J Neurosci. 2006 Feb 1;26(5):1429-38
references: 16452666
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005 Aug;134(3):343-67
references: 16131268
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Mar;7(3):134-140
references: 12639695
references: Q J Exp Psychol A. 2001 May;54(2):321-43
references: 11394050
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Feb;34(1):137-57
references: 18248145
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2003 Oct;29(5):919-36
references: 14585014
references: Psychol Bull. 2010 Sep;136(5):849-74
references: 20804238
references: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52
references: 11488380
references: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008 Mar;8(1):74-84
references: 18405048
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2010 Jul;36(4):992-1002
references: 20565214
references: Brain Res. 2008 Apr 8;1203:116-25
references: 18314093
references: J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Feb;20(2):255-67
references: 18275333
references: Brain Res. 2009 Feb 19;1255:122-31
references: 19111680
references: Psychol Res. 2007 Jul;71(4):393-400
references: 16397813
references: Psychol Sci. 2006 Feb;17(2):164-71
references: 16466425
references: Psychophysiology. 2005 Jan;42(1):56-71
references: 15720581