Cited by 188Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismCognitive Abilities and Testing

Dissociable neural mechanisms underlying response-based and familiarity-based conflict in working memory

Open access
Nelson, James K., Reuter-Lorenz, Patricia A., Sylvester, Ching-Yune C., Jonides, John, Smith, Edward E.·2003·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Cognitive control requires the resolution of interference among competing and potentially conflicting representations. Such conflict can emerge at different points between stimulus input and response generation, with the net effect being that of compromising performance. The goal of this article was to dissociate the neural mechanisms underlying different sources of conflict to elucidate the architecture of the neural systems that implement cognitive control. By using functional magnetic resonance imaging and a verbal working memory task (item recognition), we examined brain activity related to two kinds of conflict with comparable behavioral consequences. In a trial of our item-recognition task, participants saw four letters, followed by a retention interval, and a probe letter that did or did not match one of the letters held in working memory (positive probe and negative probe, respectively). On some trials, conflict arose solely because of the current negative probe having a high familiarity, due to its membership in the immediately preceding trial's target set. On other trials, additional conflict arose because of the current negative probe having also been a positive probe on the immediately preceding trial, producing response-level conflict. Consistent with previous work, conflict due to high familiarity was associated with left prefrontal activation, but not with anterior cingulate activation. The response-conflict condition, when compared with high-familiarity confli…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1334125100

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • These connections also explain why anterior midcingulate cortex resolves action selection during situations involving conflicting sensory information.

    “They also explain why the aMCC is responsible for resolving action selection during situations involving conflicting sensory information (e.g., Grindband et al. in press; Milham et al. 2001; Nelson et al. 2003; see Banich 2009; Shackman et al. 2011; van Snellenberg & Wager 2009).”

    From The brain basis of emotion: a meta-analytic review (2012) · cites this paper as Nelson et al. 2003

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 188

Authors
Nelson, J. K., Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., Sylvester, C.-Y. C., Jonides, J., & Smith, E. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, 525 East University, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1109
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2003-09-04
Volume
100
Issue
19
Pages
11171-11175
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2157187630
Cited by
188
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (AG 18286, R01AG018286)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
cognitive control, response conflict, working memory, item recognition, anterior cingulate cortex, left prefrontal cortex, conflict monitoring, interference resolution, double dissociation
MeSH terms
Conflict, Psychological, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Memory, Nervous System Physiological Phenomena

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