Cited by 127Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain function

Divergent task-dependent functional connectivity of executive control and salience networks

Elton, Amanda, Gao, Wei·2014·Cortex

Abstract

Background Previous studies have demonstrated task-dependent functional interactions of a frontal-parietal control system with the competing dorsal attention (DA) and default mode networks (DM). However, evidence suggests that the frontal-parietal control system is functionally heterogeneous, consisting of two distinct sub-networks that demonstrate dissociable intrinsic functional connectivity (FC) patterns: a frontal-parietal "executive control network" (CON) and a cingulo-opercular "salience network" (SAL). In this study, we aimed to test the hypothesis that CON and SAL would show dissociable task-dependent changes in connectivity with regard to the competing DA and DM when switching from rest to external task performance.Methods Nineteen healthy adults underwent four functional MRI scans: two during rest and two while performing a global-local selective attention task. Seed-based FC defined the CON and SAL. Connectivity changes between task and rest states were assessed by analysis of variance. The relationship of task-dependent changes in connectivity for each of these networks with behavioral measures was also characterized.Results CON and SAL demonstrated distinct stable and task-dependent regional connectivity. Whereas CON primarily increased FC with visual cortex regions associated with the DA during task performance versus rest, the SAL increased coupling with regions belonging to the DM. Greater dissociation between CON and SAL and between regions with which they coupled during task was associated with better task accuracy.Conclusions The divergent task-dependent dynamics of CON and SAL connectivity with the anti-correlated DA and DM support distinct functional roles of these two "control" networks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cortex.2013.10.012

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Elton, A., & Gao, W.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Gao, Wei
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-02
Volume
51
Pages
56-66
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978760166
Cited by
127
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of North Carolina
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
frontoparietal network, salience network, functional connectivity, dorsal attention network, default mode network, cingulo-opercular network, visual cortex, task accuracy
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Behavior, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Rest, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review