Cited by 115Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and Memory

From an Executive Network to Executive Control: A Computational Model of the n-back Task

Open access
Chatham, Christopher H., Herd, Seth A., Brant, Angela M., Hazy, Thomas E., Miyake, Akira, O'Reilly, Randy, Friedman, Naomi P.·2011·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

A paradigmatic test of executive control, the n-back task, is known to recruit a widely distributed parietal, frontal, and striatal "executive network," and is thought to require an equally wide array of executive functions. The mapping of functions onto substrates in such a complex task presents a significant challenge to any theoretical framework for executive control. To address this challenge, we developed a biologically constrained model of the n-back task that emergently develops the ability to appropriately gate, bind, and maintain information in working memory in the course of learning to perform the task. Furthermore, the model is sensitive to proactive interference in ways that match findings from neuroimaging and shows a U-shaped performance curve after manipulation of prefrontal dopaminergic mechanisms similar to that observed in studies of genetic polymorphisms and pharmacological manipulations. Our model represents a formal computational link between anatomical, functional neuroimaging, genetic, behavioral, and theoretical levels of analysis in the study of executive control. In addition, the model specifies one way in which the pFC, BG, parietal, and sensory cortices may learn to cooperate and give rise to executive control.

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 · 10.1162/jocn_a_00047

Cites

79 of 79 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?

  • Chatham et al. developed a neurally inspired model of n-back that must be trained explicitly to perform the task with a specific n, consistent with n-back requiring a novel routine.

    “Chatham et al. (2011) developed a neurally inspired model of n-back. In line with the idea that n-back requires the development of a novel routine, it has to be trained explicitly to perform the task with a specific value of n.”

    From Working memory training involves learning new skills (2019) · cites this paper as Chatham et al., 2011

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

1 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chatham, C. H., Herd, S. A., Brant, A. M., Hazy, T. E., Miyake, A., O'Reilly, R., & Friedman, N. P.
Affiliations
University of Colorado Boulder (US)
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2011-11-01
Volume
23
Issue
11
Pages
3598-3619
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2120528765
Cited by
115
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH079485, R01MH063207, MH063207, MH079485, R56MH063207)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
n-back task, executive function, executive network, computational model, working memory, proactive interference, prefrontal cortex, basal ganglia, dopaminergic mechanisms, parietal cortex, striatum, information maintenance, task learning
MeSH terms
Brain, Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Neurological, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Executive Function

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