Cited by 989Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural dynamics and brain function

Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory

McNab, Fiona, Klingberg, Torkel·2008·Nature Neuroscience

Abstract

Our capacity to store information in working memory might be determined by the degree to which only relevant information is remembered. The question remains as to how this selection of relevant items to be remembered is accomplished. Here we show that activity in the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia preceded the filtering of irrelevant information and that activity, particularly in the globus pallidus, predicted the extent to which only relevant information is stored. The preceding frontal and basal ganglia activity were also associated with inter-individual differences in working memory capacity. These findings reveal a mechanism by which frontal and basal ganglia activity exerts attentional control over access to working memory storage in the parietal cortex in humans, and makes an important contribution to inter-individual differences in working memory capacity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nn2024

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • The empirical neuroimaging literature has identified several distinct sets of brain areas underlying working-memory performance.

    “The empirical neuroimaging literature has bolstered these conceptualizations by identifying several distinct sets of brain areas underlying working-memory performance (13–17).”
  • Network reconfiguration may form a putative neurophysiological mechanism of cognitive flexibility and executive function more generally.

    “The specificity of these correlations to the frontal systems suggests that network reconfiguration may form a putative neurophysiological mechanism of cognitive flexibility and executive function more generally (16).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McNab, F., & Klingberg, T.
Affiliations
Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Klingberg, Torkel
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Published
2007-12-09
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
103-107
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
OpenAlex
W1964320082
Cited by
989
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 77 · 2012: 65
FWCI
21.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
working memory, prefrontal cortex, basal ganglia, globus pallidus, attentional control, information filtering, individual differences, working memory capacity, parietal cortex, neural activity prediction
MeSH terms
Adult, Basal Ganglia, Brain Mapping, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Prefrontal Cortex

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