Cited by 141Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Cognitive Control in Adolescence: Neural Underpinnings and Relation to Self-Report Behaviors

Open access
Andrews-Hanna, Jessica R., Mackiewicz Seghete, Kristen L., Claus, Eric D., Burgess, Gregory C., Ruzic, Luka, Banich, Marie T.·2011·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adolescence is commonly characterized by impulsivity, poor decision-making, and lack of foresight. However, the developmental neural underpinnings of these characteristics are not well established. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To test the hypothesis that these adolescent behaviors are linked to under-developed proactive control mechanisms, the present study employed a hybrid block/event-related functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Stroop paradigm combined with self-report questionnaires in a large sample of adolescents and adults, ranging in age from 14 to 25. Compared to adults, adolescents under-activated a set of brain regions implicated in proactive top-down control across task blocks comprised of difficult and easy trials. Moreover, the magnitude of lateral prefrontal activity in adolescents predicted self-report measures of impulse control, foresight, and resistance to peer pressure. Consistent with reactive compensatory mechanisms to reduced proactive control, older adolescents exhibited elevated transient activity in regions implicated in response-related interference resolution. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Collectively, these results suggest that maturation of cognitive control may be partly mediated by earlier development of neural systems supporting reactive control and delayed development of systems supporting proactive control. Importantly, the development of these mechanisms is associated with cognitive control in real-life behaviors.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0021598

Cites

86 of 86 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?

  • Several studies have demonstrated a direct relationship between age-related increases in lPFC engagement and successful cognitive control.

    “Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated a direct relationship between age-related increases in lPFC engagement and successful cognitive control (Adleman et al., 2002, Andrews-Hanna et al., 2011, Bunge et al., 2002, Casey et al., 1997, Durston et al., 2006, Rubia et al., 2006, Rubia et al., 2007, Rubia et al., 2013, Velanova et al., 2009).”

    From The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation (2016) · cites this paper as Andrews-Hanna et al., 2011

    The Results (Imaging Results; page unavailable) show that lateral prefrontal activity generally increased from adolescence to about age 21. The Results (Relationship between fMRI Activity, Stroop Performance, and Self-Report Measures of Cognitive/Social Control; page unavailable) show that greater IFJ/pDLPFC activity was significantly associated with better self-reported control in adolescents, but its association with better Stroop performance was not significant; adults showed a different pattern. The claim therefore overstates a direct relationship with successful cognitive-control performance across ages. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Studies that use the traditional Stroop color-word task find no differences in cognitive control between adolescents and adults, whereas studies that use an emotional version of the Stroop report improvements in self-regulation from adolescence to adulthood.

    “For example, studies that use the traditional Stroop color-word task find no differences in cognitive control between adolescents and adults (e.g., Andrews-Hanna et al., 2011), whereas studies that use an emotional version of the Stroop to assess the effect of emotional interference in cognitive control report improvements in self-regulation from adolescence to adulthood (e.g., Veroude et al., 201”

    From The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation (2016) · cites this paper as Andrews-Hanna et al., 2011

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Behavioral response inhibition improves linearly from childhood through adulthood.

    “The literature on behavioral response inhibition consistently demonstrates that the ability to successfully inhibit a response improves linearly from childhood through adulthood [70–72]”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Mackiewicz Seghete, K. L., Claus, E. D., Burgess, G. C., Ruzic, L., & Banich, M. T.
Affiliations
  • Mind Research Network (US)
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
Corresponding author
  • Claus, Eric D.
  • Burgess, Gregory C.
  • Ruzic, Luka
  • Banich, Marie T.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2011-06-28
Volume
6
Issue
6
Pages
e21598
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170695448
Cited by
141
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 13
FWCI
5.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH079485, MH079485)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
cognitive control, adolescence, proactive control, reactive control, Stroop task, lateral prefrontal cortex, impulse control, foresight, brain development, decision-making, impulsivity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Adult, Brain, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Young Adult, Self Report

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