Executive processes What are executive processes Executive processes

Executive processes • What are executive processes – Executive processes coordinate mental activity so that a particular goal is achieved – modulate operation of other processes (modulate = to guide or modify); however, executive processes do not actually carry out these activities – Executive processes also called cognitive control processes

Executive processes • Properties of executive processes – Bias our selection of thoughts and actions – coordinate mental activity so that a particular goal is achieved – Override automatic thoughts and habitual actions – Enables simulation of plans, identification of consequences

Executive processes • Neural basis – Frontal executive hypothesis: executive processes primarily mediated by the prefrontal cortex (PFC) – PFC – anterior to motor cortex (and for some authors the premotor cortex) – PFC includes dorsolateral PFC, anterior cingulate, Broca’s area, and the medial and orbital regions of the frontal lobes

Executive processes • Neuroanatomy of the Frontal lobes: – Prefrontal cortex: massive network that links the motor, perceptual, and limbic (emotional network) regions – Limbic system include amygdala, cingulate gyrus, orbitofrontal cortex and parts of basal ganglia

Executive processes • Frontal lobes: – About third of cerebral cortex in humans; frontal lobes are much larger in humans and are much larger than in other mammals, especially its anterior aspect – Frontal lobes separated from parietal lobes by central sulcus and from temporal lobes by lateral sulcus

Executive functions

Executive functions • Frontal lobe: – Major subdivisions of prefrontal cortex: lateral prefrontal cortex, ventromedial prefrontal cortex, and anterior cingulate – Frontal pole – most anterior end of frontal lobes

Kolb & Whishaw frontal lobe figure fyi • Lateral area 6 premotor cortex • Medial area 6 supplementary motor cortex • Area 8 frontal eye field

Executive processes fyi • Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (areas 9 and 46) • Medial frontal cortex (areas 25 and 32) • Inferior (ventral) prefrontal cortex (areas 11, 12, 13, and 14); also called orbitofrontal cortex

Executive processes • Properties of PFC that are crucial for executive processing – Perceptual, motor, cortical, and subcortical brain structures project to PFC – This makes it possible to combine information from diverse sources, thereby enabling complex behavior – PFC has projections to multiple brain structures – This permits it to modulate (exert top-down guidance) on other neural processes

Executive processes • Working memory and lateral prefrontal cortex – A previous lecture discuss working memory – Baddeley’s model of working memory was presented

Baddeley’s working memory model Visuo-spatial sketchpad Phonological loop Central Executive

Executive processes • Content-based model of working memory – Baddeley’s model is known as a content-based model of working memory because it assumes that different systems represent different content – Phonological stores linguistic info and visusospatial represents visual and spatial information – Model based on behavioral data reviewed in prior lecture

Executive processes • Process-based models of working memory – It has been hypothesized that different regions of the PFC are recruited to carry out different tasks – In other words different processes are associated with different brain regions

Executive processes • Test of Content vs process-based models of WM – In some tasks a participant is presented a stimulus, then is required to internally maintain a representation of that stimulus, until a probe is presented (maintenance condition) – In an n-back task the participant is required to keep in mind a stream of stimuli and respond only if the stimulus was presented n-back – Requires maintenance + manipulation

Executive functions • Illustration of n-back task • Note, the need to maintain information in memory and manipulate it

Executive processes • D’Esposito et al. (1998) – Meta-analysis – D’Esposito and colleagues performed a metaanalysis to investigate content-based and process-based accounts of working memory – Aside: meta-analysis – quantitative review of findings from several studies

Executive processes • D’Esposito et al. (1998) – One might expect based on the content account of working memory that the phonological loop might be left lateralized and the spatial sketchpad should be right lateralized as it is for perception – To investigate this possibility D’Esposito categorized studies based on their content (spatial, nonspatial)

Executive processes • D’Esposito et al. (1998) – Results support the hypothesis that spatial tasks tend to be associated with activation of the right prefrontal cortex, whereas nonspatial tasks are associated with activation of the left prefrontal cortex – However, there was bilateral activation in many studies – See top panel

Executive processes • D’Esposito et al. (1998) – to investigate the process-based account of working memory, tasks were categorized as requiring maintenance or maintenance plus (maintenance + manipulation) – Results showed that tasks requiring maintenance plus had more dorsolateral activation – See bottom panel

D’Esposito et al. (1998) • Top panel shows active foci for spatial and nonspatial tasks (content) • Bottom panel shows active foci for maintenance and maintenance + tasks

Executive processes • Conclusions – D’Esposito findings are inconclusive, but do provide support for the hypothesis that maintenance plus processing occurs in a different region (dorsolateral PFC) than maintenance processing – This is consistent with process-based models of WM

Executive functions Stroop test • This test assesses the ability to maintain a goal and ignore/suppress habitual (prepotent) responses, an important executive function

Executive functions Stroop effect demonstration – in this next slide I want you to name the ink colours of the words as rapidly as possible

Stroop (slide 1) äred yellow ägreen red yellow äblue green red yellow äred green red yellow blue red green

Executive functions Stroop effect demonstration – in this next slide I want you to name the ink colours of the words as rapidly as possible

Stroop (slide 2) äred yellow ägreen red yellow äblue green red yellow äred green red yellow blue red green

Executive functions Stroop effect demonstration – in this next slide I want you to name the ink colours of the colour patches as rapidly as possible

Stroop (slide 3)

Executive functions Stroop effect • The increase in time it takes to name of color when the word name does not match the color versus naming color patches is called the colorword interference effect (slide 1 time/slide 3 slide) • Note: different versions of the Stroop assess interference in slightly different ways

Executive functions Age Dot time (DT) M (SD) Color Interference Errors word time CWT/DT Color word (CWT) M (SD) 18 -39 11. 0 (2. 5) 22. 1 (7. 2) 2. 0 (0. 6) 0. 8 (1. 0) 75 -74 13. 3 (3. 6) 32. 6 (9. 6) 2. 6 (0. 9) 0. 6 (1. 2) timecolor = name color; color word time = name color word DT Dot = Name of dot; dot CWT = Name color of word designating Troyer, Leach, Strauss (2006), 13, 20 -35 color

Executive functions Stroop effect • Age effects – age significantly increases the magnitude of the interference effect • Gender differences are not always present in the interference score • The higher the IQ score the lower the interference effect

Executive functions Stroop effect • Standard interpretation of Stroop – participant must selectively attend to the name of the ink color and ignore the word name (of a color)

Executive functions Wisconsin Card Sort • Used to assess for executive dysfunction and frontal lobe damage • 4 stimulus cards are arranged in front of a participant; cards vary on 3 dimensions: shape, color, number • Participants are given a deck of cards and must match each card with 1 of the stimulus cards, but are not told on which dimension they are matching • Participants are told “right” or “wrong”

Executive functions

Executive functions • Participants are given a deck of cards and must match each card to 1 of the 4 stimulus cards • Participants guess at first, but since they are given feedback, they learn the correct attribute • After sorting about 10 cards correctly, the examiner changes the attribute without warning • Normal participants soon figure out correct attribute for sorting

Executive functions • Frontal lobe patients and normal participants do not differ in learning first critical trial, but they differ in the ability to switch attributes • Normal participants switch after a few trials of negative feedback; frontal lobe patients are less able to switch

Executive functions • Executive function needed when multiple representations in working memory or multiple processes are competing for control of behavior and thought • In Stroop task there is competition, but this sort of competition is a feature of a broad range of tasks • E. g. , it has been shown that naming the color of a picture of a banana is slowed when it is not yellow (e. g. , red) • An incompatibility between an automatic response and a correct response results in Stroop-like effects

Executive functions • Stimulus-response compatibility – Stimulus response compatibility exists when the response is compatible with the way people would naturally respond to that stimulus – E. g. , high pitch respond – “up”; low pitch respond – “down” – E. g. , stimulus presented on left or right side of display requires a response on same side as stimulus was presented

Executive functions • Stimulus-response compatibility – Stimulus response compatibility is observed even when position of object is irrelevant to response (Simon, 1990) – E. g. , suppose task is to make a right-handed response when a circle is presented and a left-handed response to a triangle; reaction time is faster when the circle or triangle is presented on the side of the response – Interpretation – when there is an automatic connection between a stimulus and a response, little executive attention is required; – when 2 sources of information are incompatible, attention must be paid in order to focus on the relevant information and inhibit/ignore the irrelevant information

Executive functions • Cohen’s model of Stroop – Cohen and colleagues have developed a neural network model of Stroop task – model proposes that in addition to initial visual perceptual processing of color (occipital lobes) and visual words (temporal lobes), two additional attentional processes are required

Executive functions • Cohen’s model of Stroop • 1. attention controller – This process keeps track of the task goal – necessary because during incompatible trials in the color word condition, the name of the color font and the name of the word, which designates a color are two competing responses

Executive functions • Cohen’s model of Stroop • 2. conflict monitor – This process monitors the amount of conflict between potential responses

Executive functions Stroop effect • Other points – neuroimaging and lesion studies are consistent with hypothesis that frontal lobes are associated with Stroop • Data also suggest that performance is mediated by a more broadly based system

Executive functions • Neuroimaging evidence – Jonides and colleagues (2002) performed a meta-analysis of Stroop studies and related studies – Results showed that the anterior cingulate and dorsolateral PFC were activated – Consistent with Cohen model because it is known from other research that the anterior cingulate is activated mediates conflict and the dorsolateral PFC is involved in executive attention

Executive processes • Executive processes & memory for temporal order – Individuals with PFC damage may be impaired in their ability to organize temporally events in memory – Milner (1995) performed a recency experiment in which participants were required to discriminate which of two events was presented more recently

Executive processes • Memory for temporal order Milner (1995) – Participants were presented pairs of stimuli (e. g. , 2 pictures of objects) – Every so often a probe card is presented with ? – Task: to choose picture with more recently presented object

Executive processes • Milner (1995) Memory for temporal order – Experimental condition– both objects had been presented previously – Control condition – one picture presented previously one picture new (Recognition test)

Executive processes • Memory for temporal order Milner (1995) – 3 groups of participants were tested – Controls – Unilateral damage to dorsolateral PFC px – Unilateral damage to temporal px – Px underwent surgery for relief from focal epilepsy

Milner recency discrimination experiment • Top panel shows stimuli used in exp’t • Bottom panel shows that PFC participants were impaired relative to other 2 groups on recency discrimination test but not on recognition test

Executive processes • Memory for temporal order Milner (1995) – Other findings – this experiment was also performed with word stimuli – Results showed that the effect was lateralized – – Patients with LHD were more impaired on recency discrimination when words were used, whereas px with RHD were more impaired with pictures

Executive processes • Memory for temporal order Self-ordered pointing – Keeping track of previous experienced events (memory for temporal order) has been examined using a self-ordered pointing task – In this task participant is presented n card with n objects depicted on it – The same objects are present on each card but their order is scrambled from card to card

Executive processes • Memory for temporal order Self-ordered pointing – Task of participant is to point to the a different object on each card (one that hasn’t yet been pointed to) – Results – Frontal lobe patients made more errors than controls; discrepency between 2 groups increased with n, the number of objects and cards

Executive processes • Source memory – Source memory refers to when we learned a fact or the context in which a fact was learned –e. g. , who told you fact or in what context you viewed a face – Source memory appears to require frontal lobe function

Executive processes • Source memory – Janowsky, Shimamura, & Squire (1999) – In this experiment participants were taught new facts (e. g. , “The name of the dog on the cracker box is Bingo”)

Executive processes • Source memory – Janowsky, Shimamura, & Squire (1999) – 6 -8 days later participants were asked to answer questions about these newly learned facts and other facts that might have been acquired outside of the experiment; if they recalled the fact they were asked questions about when they learned the fact (during the previous session or reading, school etc. )

Executive processes • Source memory – Janowsky, Shimamura, & Squire (1999) – Results – Controls and frontal lobe patients did not differ in recall of facts – Frontal lobe participants were impaired in recall of source of facts

Executive functions • Sequencing – Many activities of everyday living require people to plan and then carry out a sequence of activities, which must satisfy certain requirements in order to achieve a goal – Studies have shown that patients with PFC damage are impaired on certain sequencing activities, but not all sequencing activities

Executive functions • Sequencing – how is temporal order coded? – An important component of sequencing is coding temporal order of events – Evidence suggests that there are several different ways in which temporal order might be coded and that the coding of temporal order often involves separate processes from the coding of item information

Executive functions • Sequencing – how is temporal order coded? – For example, there is evidence to suggest that memory for order information (information about associations) depends critically upon the hippocampus, but item information can be carried out independently of the hippocampus – There is also evidence indicating that sequential information can be stored and processed in a variety of ways

Executive functions • Sequencing – how is temporal order coded? – There are many ways to code temporal order and there is evidence for each of these ways depending upon the task and other factors – 1. Associative – e. g. , X R C B L ; code as X precedes R; R precedes C; C precedes L etc. – 2. order tags – e. g. , X R C B L; code as X is first; R is second; C is third, etc. – 3. familiarity – e. g. , a form of representation in which strength or familiarity of item is continuously represented, so more recent items are stronger than earlier items, allowing participants to make a judgement on that basis (e. g. , B is stronger then C)

Executive functions • Sequencing related items – In many everyday situations, sequences of actions are related to each other, and in many cases have been performed several times in the past – E. g. , eating out typically involves being greeted, taken to a table, ordering a meal, eating, getting a bill, paying, and leaving (Schank & Abelson, 1977) – It is also possible to generate a novel script (e. g. , opening a beauty salon)

Executive functions • Sequencing related items – Sirigu et al. (1985) performed an experiment in which patients with PFC damage, damage to the posterior cortex, and normal controls were tested on familiar and novel scripts – Participants were asked to generate familiar (going to a restaurant) and novel (opening a beauty salon) actions and then they were asked to order the actions into correct sequences

Executive functions • Sequencing related items – No significance difference in the number or type of actions generated – Individuals with PFC damage made more errors than other 2 groups when asked to order generated actions in correct sequence and the pattern was amplified with novel scripts – Similar findings were obtained when the different groups were given cards with actions for scripts written on them

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Individuals, who spontaneously confabulate have also been used to investigate role of the frontal lobes and executive function in memory – Spontaneous confabulation – statements are actions that reflect unintentional but obvious distortions of memory – “honest lying” – Spontaneous confabulation is found sometimes but not always after px who survive aneurysms of the anterior communicating artery (ACo. A)

ACo. A • Ventral view of arteries in brain • Damage to ACo. A may result in memory loss, personality change and amnesia • Damage to ACo. A often results in PFC damage

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Gilboa et al. (2006) investigated spontaneous confabulations – Participants were ACo. A individuals who confabulate, ACo. A individuals who do not confabulate, and controls

Executive functions Spontaneous confabulations – Temporal context judgment experiment – In this experiment participants were required to make temporal context judgments about pictures of objects (Was this object presented earlier in this list; i. e. , not a previous list? ) – Results – Not all ACo. A patients were impaired on the temporal context confusion experiment, but those with ventromedial prefrontal cortex damage were impaired

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Familiar narratives experiment (fairy tales and bible stories) – In this experiment participants were asked to recall familiar narratives – Results: spontaneous confabulators did not differ from ACo. As in terms of details recalled, but differed in terms of the number and type of errors (e. g. , incorporation of details from other stories, idiosyncratic details) –

Semantic narrative performance • Top: mean details produced • Bottom: proportion errors – T = total errors; D = distortions; E = external details (other stories); I = idiosyncratic errors

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Further analyses – Only px with ventromedial prefrontal and orbitofrontal cortical damage were spontaneous confabulators

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Conclusion: spontaneous confabulation does not appear to be a result of confusing true memories in time (evidence: spontaneous confabulator errors such as semantic narrative external details) – instead it appears to be a difficulty of strategic retrieval and difficulties of monitoring – Strategic retrieval refers to a type of memory retrieval in which the target memory is not directly elicited by the retrieval cue (e. g. , what did you do on your birthday? ), but appears to require problem solving

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Evidence for strategic retrieval – 1. Evidence from current study – 2. Finding that spontaneous confabulation is observed even for remote memories acquired prior to brain damage (when encoding of memories was intact); suggests stored memory is relatively intact and problem is in retrieval

Executive functions • Spontaneous confabulations – Gilboa et al. proposed: – Strategic retrieval helps frame the memory problem and memory search – Constrains memory search – Once a memory is retrieved strategic retrieval monitors recovered memory for plausibility – Strategic retrieval appears to be mediated by the ventromedial and orbito-frontal regions of the PFC

Executive functions • Goal planning – Many goals have goal/subgoal hierarchical structure – E. g. , goal: Do well on exam – Subgoals: complete readings; go to lectures; study before exam; be well rested – Subgoals of study before exam äOutline lectures/readings äMake sure all notes are available äStudy with a friend – Subgoal of: outline readings äRead 3 sections of chapter per day; outline reading as I go; review outline when done

Executive functions • Many goals have goal/subgoal hierarchical structure – Notes – 1. hierarchical structure – 2. higher-level goals are more abstract than lower level goals

Executive functions • Goal planning – To achieve these types of goals necessary to: 1. Identify goal/subgoal structure 2. Identify resources needed to achieve each goal and subgoal 3. Identify consequences of different subgoals

Executive functions • Goal planning 1. Identify resources needed to achieve goal (e. g. ) - Set aside time to attend lectures Be sure to outline lectures/readings 2. Consequences of means to achieve subgoals (e. g. ) - Review with friend – friend wants to party, you have romantic interest in friend oops!!) Study by cramming – inefficient study approach especially because final is cumulative, and I will be tired –don’t do it!

Executive functions • Goal planning implications – If complex goals are hierarchical then äAchieving a complex goal can fail for several reasons äclinical and experimental literature findings have showed that failure occurs for several different reasons

Executive functions • Effects of abstraction on performance and brain activation: Neuroimaging study – Manipulated abstraction by constructing 4 conditions that varied in abstraction – simplest task (a) – More abstract task (b) – Quite abstract task (c) – Most abstract task (d) – Badre et al. , 3007, J of Cognitive Neuroscience

Executive functions A – premotor cortex was sensitive to all 4 tasks B – anterior premotor cortex was sensitive to all but the most simple task C – inferior frontal sulcus was sensitive to the 2 most abstract tasks D – frontopolar cortex was only sensitive to the most abstract task

Executive functions • Results – More complex/abstract tasks activated more anterior regions than less abstract tasks – More anterior regions were more sensitive, that is, were only activated by more abstract tasks • Conclusions – 1. more abstract tasks rely regions that process less abstract information; suggests that participants impaired in their performance of less abstract tasks will fail on more complex tasks; conversely participants, who perform tasks at all but the highest level should be able to perform less abstract tasks

Executive functions • Conclusions cont’d – 2. Findings are consistent with the idea that PFC function has a gradient from more specific to more abstract processing – More specific processing in the more posterior motor areas, more abstract in the more anterior brain regions, and most abstract in the most anterior, polar regions of the frontal lobe

Executive functions • Lesion studies of hierarchical goal-subgoal planning – Implication of hierarchical goal-subgoal planning is that px who fail on simpler tasks will also fail on more complex tasks – Badre et al. (2009) investigated px with PFC damage using the same task just described – px with more posterior damage centred on the pre-motor cortex failed on all tasks – Px with more anterior damage were unimpaired on less abstract tasks (a and b), but impaired more abstract tasks (c and d)

Executive functions

Executive functions (social, personality and emotional functions) • This slide is a diagram of the skull of Phineus Gage • As a result of this patient we now know that executive functions are also involved in personality, social, and emotional functions