The neural substrate and temporal dynamics of interference effects in working memory as revealed by event-related functional MRI
Open accessAbstract
Research on the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of monkeys and humans indicates that this region supports a heterogeneous repertoire of mental processes that contribute to many complex behaviors, such as working memory. Anatomical evidence for some of these processes derives from functional neuroimaging experiments using blocked experimental designs, which average signal across all components of many trials and therefore cannot dissociate distinct processes with different time courses. Using event-related functional MRI, we were able to isolate temporally the neural correlates of processes contributing to the target presentation, delay, and probe portions of an item-recognition task. Two types of trials were of greatest interest: those with Recent Negative probes that matched an item from the target set of the previous, but not the present, two trials, and those with Nonrecent Negative probes that did not match a target item from either the present or the two previous trials. There was no difference between the two trial types in target presentation (i.e., encoding) or delay-period (i.e., active maintenance) PFC activation, but there was significantly greater activation for Recent Negatives than Nonrecent Negative activation associated with the probe period within left ventrolateral PFC. These findings characterize spatially and temporally a proactive interference effect that may reflect the operation of a PFC-mediated response-inhibition mechanism that contributes to working memory performance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 left inferior frontal gyrus may resolve interference from previous trials in working memory tasks.
“resolve interference from previous trials in working memory tasks.44”
From Cognitive inflexibility and frontal–cortical activation in pediatric obsessive–compulsive disorder (2010) · cites this paper as [44]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 329
- Authors
- D’Esposito, M., Postle, B. R., Jonides, J., & Smith, E. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1999-06-22
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 7514-7519
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC22117
- OpenAlex
- W2163080134
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 8.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- American Federation for Aging Research
- National Institutes of Health (5k08ns001762-05, 7r01ag013483-05, NS01762, AG13483)
- National Institute on Aging (AG 13483)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 01762)
- 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 › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- working memory, proactive interference, prefrontal cortex, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, response inhibition, temporal dynamics, memory maintenance, neural correlates
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Memory, Neurons, Radiography, Task Performance and Analysis, 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