The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Default network activity, coupled with the frontoparietal control network, supports goal-directed cognition
Open accessAbstract
Tasks that demand externalized attention reliably suppress default network activity while activating the dorsal attention network. These networks have an intrinsic competitive relationship; activation of one suppresses activity of the other. Consequently, many assume that default network activity is suppressed during goal-directed cognition. We challenge this assumption in an fMRI study of planning. Recent studies link default network activity with internally focused cognition, such as imagining personal future events, suggesting a role in autobiographical planning. However, it is unclear how goal-directed cognition with an internal focus is mediated by these opposing networks. A third anatomically interposed 'frontoparietal control network' might mediate planning across domains, flexibly coupling with either the default or dorsal attention network in support of internally versus externally focused goal-directed cognition, respectively. We tested this hypothesis by analyzing brain activity during autobiographical versus visuospatial planning. Autobiographical planning engaged the default network, whereas visuospatial planning engaged the dorsal attention network, consistent with the anti-correlated domains of internalized and externalized cognition. Critically, both planning tasks engaged the frontoparietal control network. Task-related activation of these three networks was anatomically consistent with independently defined resting-state functional connectivity MRI maps. Task-related functional connectivity analyses demonstrate that the default network can be involved in goal-directed cognition when its activity is coupled with the frontoparietal control network. Additionally, the frontoparietal control network may flexibly couple with the default and dorsal attention networks according to task domain, serving as a cortical mediator linking the two networks in support of goal-directed cognitive processes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For example, the default and control networks show cooperation during autobiographical future planning—constructing a detailed and sequential mental representation about a future goal state [10, 19, 24].”
From Creative Cognition and Brain Network Dynamics (2016) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We propose that creative thought involves similar cognitive and neural mechanisms as other forms of goal-directed, self-generated cognition (e.g., autobiographical future planning; [10, 19, 24]).”
From Creative Cognition and Brain Network Dynamics (2016) · cites this paper as [10]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In this context, the control network may modify and direct self-generated thoughts to meet the demands of task-specific goals [10–11, 20].”
From Creative Cognition and Brain Network Dynamics (2016) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“The FPCN (as well as the salience network; Box 3) may in turn, mediate internally and externally directed cognition by maintaining a dynamic balance between the default and attention networks.15,155,160,162,163”
From The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance (2014) · cites this paper as [162]
In the citing paper
“However, the FPCN has also been shown to play an important role in regulating self-generated mnemonic, social, and emotional information, and does so by varying its functional connectivity with the DAN or the DN, respectively.”
From The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance (2014) · cites this paper as [162]
In the citing paper
“Although spatially distinct, the FPCN is anatomically interposed between the default and dorsal attention networks,51,160,162 suggesting it may play an important modulatory role in the activation and suppression of these other networks based on switching goal states.”
From The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance (2014) · cites this paper as [162]
In the citing paper
“Visuospatial planning engaged the DAN, whereas autobiographical planning engaged the DN. Both engaged the FPCN and, critically, task-related functional connectivity analyses indicated that this network was coupled with the DN during autobiographical planning and with the dorsal attention network during visuospatial planning.”
From The default network and self-generated thought: component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance (2014) · cites this paper as [162]
In the citing paper
“Such findings fit with the notion that brain networks functionally couple and uncouple as required by task demands, and a number of studies report connectivity between DMN and frontoparietal control network as the need for flexible or creative thinking increases (e.g., Beaty, Benedek, Barry Kaufman, & Silvia, 2015;Roberts & Addis, 2018;Spreng, Stevens, Chamberlain, Gilmore, & Schacter, 2010).”
From Mental Time Travel? A Neurocognitive Model of Event Simulation. (2020) · cites this paper as Spreng, Stevens, Chamberlain, Gilmore, & Schacter, 2010
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Baltosser, W. H., & Zar, J. H. (1996) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/2265725 · Cited by 35,166
A default mode of brain function
Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.676 · Cited by 12,190
Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo‐planar mri
Biswal, B., Zerrin Yetkin, F., Haughton, V. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1995) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.1910340409 · Cited by 9,812
The Brain's Default Network: Anatomy, Function, and Relevance to Disease
Buckner, R. L., Andrews‐Hanna, J. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2008) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1196/annals.1440.011 · Cited by 9,761
Self-citationThe human brain is intrinsically organized into dynamic, anticorrelated functional networks
Fox, M. D., Snyder, A. Z., Vincent, J. L., Corbetta, M., Van Essen, D. C., & Raichle, M. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0504136102 · Cited by 8,553
Higgins, E. T. (1997) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.12.1280 · Cited by 6,775
Spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity observed with functional magnetic resonance imaging
Fox, M. D., & Raichle, M. E. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2201 · Cited by 6,700
Saliency, switching, attention and control: a network model of insula function
Menon, V., & Uddin, L. Q. (2010) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-010-0262-0 · Cited by 5,592
Correspondence of the brain's functional architecture during activation and rest
Smith, S. M., Fox, P. T., Miller, K. L., Glahn, D. C., Fox, P. M., Mackay, C. E., Filippini, N., Watkins, K. E., Toro, R., Laird, A. R., et al. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0905267106 · Cited by 5,150
Consistent resting-state networks across healthy subjects
Damoiseaux, J. S., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Barkhof, F., Scheltens, P., Stam, C. J., Smith, S. M., & Beckmann, C. F. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0601417103 · Cited by 4,326
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Situating the default-mode network along a principal gradient of macroscale cortical organization
Margulies, D. S., Ghosh, S. S., Goulas, A., Falkiewicz, M., Huntenburg, J. M., Langs, G., Bezgin, G., Eickhoff, S. B., Castellanos, F. X., Petrides, M., et al. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1608282113 · Cited by 2,321
Andrews‐Hanna, J. R., Smallwood, J., & Spreng, R. N. (2014) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.12360 · Cited by 2,102
Self-citationSpreng, R. N., Mar, R. A., & Kim, A. S. N. (2009) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.21029 · Cited by 2,143
Self-citationNiendam, T. A., Laird, A. R., Ray, K. L., Dean, Y. M., Glahn, D. C., & Carter, C. S. (2012) · Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-011-0083-5 · Cited by 1,700
Mind-wandering as spontaneous thought: a dynamic framework
Christoff, K., Irving, Z. C., Fox, K. C. R., Spreng, R. N., & Andrews-Hanna, J. R. (2016) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn.2016.113 · Cited by 1,376
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Spreng, R. N., Stevens, W. D., Chamberlain, J. P., Gilmore, A. W., & Schacter, D. L.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Spreng, R. Nathan
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 303-317
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2914129
- OpenAlex
- W1998268694
- Cited by
- 1,256
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 75 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 79 · 2021: 87 · 2020: 93 · 2019: 87 · 2018: 98 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 85 · 2015: 86 · 2014: 87 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 47
- FWCI
- 27.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (MH060941)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- default mode network, dorsal attention network, frontoparietal network, goal-directed cognition, planning, resting-state functional connectivity, network coupling
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Cognition, Decision Making, Female, Frontal Lobe, Goals, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Parietal Lobe, Feedback, Physiological, Young Adult
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
