Cited by 138Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

The effect of cingulate cortex lesions on task switching and working memory

Rushworth, M. F. S., Hadland, K. A., Gaffan, D., Passingham, R. E.·2003·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Anatomic interconnections between the prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices suggest that these areas may have similar functions. Here we report the effect of anterior cingulate removal on task switching, error monitoring, and working memory. Neuroimaging studies have implicated the cingulate cortex in all these processes. Six macaques were taught task switching (TS) and delayed alternation (DA) paradigms. TS required switching between two conditional response tasks with mutually incompatible response selection rules. DA required alternation between two identically covered food-well positions. In the first set of experiments, anterior cingulate lesions did not consistently impair TS or DA performance. One animal performed worst on both TS and DA and in this animal the cingulate sulcus lesion was most complete. In the second set of experiments, we confirmed that larger anterior cingulate lesions, which included the sulcus, consistently impaired TS but only led to a mild and equivocal impairment of DA. The TS error pattern, however, did not suggest an impairment of TS per se. The consequence of a cingulate lesion is, therefore, distinct to that of a prefrontal lesion. TS error distribution analyses provided some support for a cingulate role in monitoring responses for errors and subsequent correction but the pattern of reaction time change in TS was also indicative of a failure to sustain attention to the task and the responses being made.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/089892903321593072

Cites

92 of 92 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?

  • Delayed alternation was spared even though anterior cingulate gyrus lesions consistently involved the cingulum bundle.

    “In other reports, delayed alternation was spared, even though the anterior cingulate gyrus lesions again consistently involved the cingulum bundle (Rushworth et al., 2003).”

    From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Rushworth et al., 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rushworth, M. F. S., Hadland, K. A., Gaffan, D., & Passingham, R. E.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
2003-04-01
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
338-353
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2068032563
Cited by
138
References
92
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 12
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Royal Society
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
anterior cingulate cortex, cingulate sulcus, task switching, working memory, error monitoring, delayed alternation, prefrontal cortex, lesion effects, macaque, attentional control, error correction
MeSH terms
Animals, Gyrus Cinguli, Macaca, Memory, Memory, Short-Term, Psychomotor Performance

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