Cited by 464Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

Exploration of the neural substrates of executive functioning by functional neuroimaging

Open access
Collette, F., Hogge, M., Salmon, E., Van der Linden, M.·2006·Neuroscience

Abstract

This review presents neuroimaging studies that have explored the cerebral substrates of executive functioning. These studies have demonstrated that different executive functions not only recruit various frontal areas but also depend upon posterior (mainly parietal) regions. These results are in accordance with the hypothesis that executive functioning relies on a distributed cerebral network that is not restricted to anterior cerebral areas. However, there exists an important heterogeneity in the cerebral areas associated with these different processes, and also between different tasks assessing the same process. Since these discrepant results could be due to the paradigms used (subtraction designs), recent results obtained with conjunction and interaction analyses are presented, which confirm the role of parietal areas in executive functioning and also demonstrate the existence of some specificity in the neural substrates of the executive processes of updating, shifting and inhibition. Finally, functional magnetic resonance imaging studies show that the activity in cerebral areas involved in executive tasks can be transient or sustained. Consequently, to better characterize the functional role of areas associated with executive functioning, it is important to take into account not only the localization of cerebral activity but also the temporal pattern of this activity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.05.035

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • At the neurobiological level, unity can be seen in the overall patterns of neural activations during CC tasks: individuals performing these kinds of tasks generally activate some of the same brain regions across multiple tasks, although they also activate some regions that are unique to a particular task.

    “At the neurobiological level, this unity can be seen in the overall patterns of neural activations during CC tasks [135–137]: Neuroimaging studies suggest that individuals performing these kinds of tasks generally activate some of the same brain regions across multiple tasks, although they also activate some regions that are unique to a particular task.”
  • Performance on different EF tasks reflects the joint contribution of a common frontoparietal network and unique, component-specific brain regions.

    “In line with the unity/diversity framework, a number of reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated that performance on different EF tasks reflects the joint contribution of a common frontoparietal network and unique, component-specific brain regions (Wager and Smith, 2003; Wager et al., 2004; Collette et al., 2006; Niendam et al., 2012).”

    From Executive control training from middle childhood to adolescence (2014) · cites this paper as Collette et al., 2006

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [8]8. Baddeley AD (1986) Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  2. [66]66. Logan GD (1994) On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A user's guide to the stop-signal paradigm. In: Inhibition processes in attention, memory and language (Dagenbach D, Carr TH, eds), pp 189-239 San Diego, CA: Academic press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collette, F., Hogge, M., Salmon, E., & Van der Linden, M.
Affiliations
University of Liège (BE)
Corresponding author
Collette, F.
Venue
Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-04
Volume
139
Issue
1
Pages
209-221
ISSN
0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106702178
Cited by
464
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 35
FWCI
7.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
executive function, neural correlates, distributed neural networks, frontal cortex, parietal cortex, working memory updating, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, conjunction analysis, interaction analysis, temporal dynamics of brain activity
MeSH terms
Cerebral Cortex, Cognition, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Parietal Lobe, Time Factors, Positron-Emission Tomography

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