Repetitive antisaccade execution does not increase the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost

Acute stress imparts a transient benefit to task-switching that is not modulated following a single bout of exercise

Introduction

Cognitive flexibility represents a core component of executive function that promotes the ability to efficiently alternate-or "switch"-between different tasks. Literature suggests that acute stress negatively impacts cognitive flexibility, whereas a single bout of aerobic exercise supports a postexercise improvement in cognitive flexibility. Here, we examined whether a single bout of aerobic exercise attenuates a stress-induced decrement in task-switching.

Materials and Methods

Forty participants (age range = 19-30) completed the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and were randomized into separate Exercise or Rest groups entailing 20-min sessions of heavy intensity exercise (80% of heart rate maximum via cycle ergometer) or rest, respectively. Stress induction was confirmed via state anxiety and heart rate. Task-switching was assessed prior to the TSST (i.e., pre-TSST), following the TSST (i.e., post-TSST), and following Exercise and Rest interventions (i.e., post-intervention) via pro- (i.e., saccade to veridical target location) and antisaccades (i.e., saccade mirror-symmetrical to target location) arranged in an AABB task-switching paradigm. The underlying principle of the AABB paradigm suggests that when prosaccades are preceded by antisaccades (i.e., task-switch trials), the reaction times are longer compared to their task-repeat counterparts (i.e., unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost).

Results

As expected, the pre-TSST assessment yielded a prosaccade switch cost. Notably, post-TSST physiological measures indicated a reliable stress response and at this assessment a null prosaccade switch-cost was observed. In turn, post-intervention assessments revealed a switch-cost independent of Exercise and Rest groups.

Conclusion

Accordingly, the immediate effects of acute stress supported improved task-switching in young adults; however, these benefits were not modulated by a single bout of aerobic exercise.

A Single Bout of Exercise Provides a Persistent Benefit to Cognitive Flexibility

Purpose: A single bout of exercise enhances activity within the cortical networks that support executive function. It is, however, unclear whether exercise improves each core component of executive function and for how long a putative benefit might persist. Method: In Experiment 1, participants completed 20-min of aerobic exercise (via cycle ergometer) and cognitive flexibility-a core component of executive function-was examined pre-exercise, and at immediate, 30- and 60-min post-exercise assessments. Experiment 2 entailed a non-exercise control (i.e., participants sat on the ergometer without exercising) involving the same timeline of cognitive flexibility assessment. Cognitive flexibility was measured via stimulus-driven (SD) and minimally delayed (MD) saccades arranged in an AABB paradigm. SD and MD saccades require a response at target onset and after target offset, respectively, with the latter requiring executive control. Work has shown that reaction times for a SD saccade preceded by a MD saccade are longer than when a SD saccade is preceded by its same task-type, whereas the converse switch does not influence performance (i.e., the unidirectional switch-cost). Results: Experiment 1 showed a unidirectional switch-cost at each assessment; however, the switch-cost magnitude was decreased at immediate and 30-min assessments compared to the pre- and 60-min assessments. In contrast, Experiment 2 did not elicit a change in switch-cost magnitude across the different assessments. Discussion/Conclusion: Thus, a single-bout of exercise benefitted the cognitive flexibility component of executive function in the immediate and 30-min post-exercise assessments.

The unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost: no evidence for the passive dissipation of an oculomotor task-set inertia

Cognitive flexibility is a core component of executive function and supports the ability to ‘switch’ between different tasks. Our group has examined the cost associated with switching between a prosaccade (i.e., a standard task requiring a saccade to veridical target location) and an antisaccade (i.e., a non-standard task requiring a saccade mirror-symmetrical to veridical target) in predictable (i.e., AABB) and unpredictable (e.g., AABAB…) switching paradigms. Results have shown that reaction times (RTs) for a prosaccade preceded by an antisaccade (i.e., task-switch trial) are longer than when preceded by its same task-type (i.e., task-repeat trial), whereas RTs for antisaccade task-switch and task-repeat trials do not differ. The asymmetrical switch-cost has been attributed to an antisaccade task-set inertia that proactively delays a subsequent prosaccade (i.e., the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost). A salient question arising from previous work is whether the antisaccade task-set inertia passively dissipates or persistently influences prosaccade RTs. Accordingly, participants completed separate AABB (i.e., A = prosaccade, B = antisaccade) task-switching conditions wherein the preparation interval for each trial was ‘short’ (1000–2000 ms; i.e., the timeframe used in previous work), ‘medium’ (3000–4000 ms) and ‘long’ (5000–6000 ms). Results demonstrated a reliable prosaccade switch-cost for each condition (ps < 0.02) and two one-sided test statistics indicated that switch cost magnitudes were within an equivalence boundary (ps < 0.05). Hence, null and equivalence tests demonstrate that an antisaccade task-set inertia does not passively dissipate and represents a temporally persistent feature of oculomotor control.

A single bout of moderate intensity exercise improves cognitive flexibility: evidence from task-switching

Executive function entails the core components of response  inhibition, working memory and cognitive flexibility. An accumulating literature has shown that a single bout of exercise improves the response inhibition  and working memory components of executive function; however, limited work has examined a putative exercise-related improvement to cognitive flexibility. To address this limitation, Experiment 1 entailed a 20-min session of moderate intensity aerobic exercise (via cycle ergometer), and pre- and post-exercise cognitive flexibility was examined via a task-switching paradigm involving alternating pro- and antisaccades (AABB: A = prosaccade, B = antisaccade). In Experiment 2, participants sat on the cycle ergometer without exercising (i.e., rest break) and the same AABB paradigm was examined pre- and post-break. We used an AABB pro- and antisaccade paradigm because previous work has shown that a prosaccade preceded by an antisaccade exhibits a reliable-and large magnitude-increase in reaction time, whereas the converse switch does not (i.e., the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost). Experiment 1 showed a unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost pre-exercise (p = .012)-but not post-exercise (p = .30), and a two one-sided t test indicated that the latter comparison was within an equivalence boundary (p < .01). In contrast, Experiment 2 revealed a unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost at pre- and post-break assessments (ps < .01). Accordingly, our results indicate that a single bout of exercise improves cognitive flexibility and provides convergent evidence that exercise improves global components of executive function.

Pro- and antisaccade task-switching: response suppression-and not vector inversion-contributes to a task-set inertia

Alternating between different tasks represents an executive function essential to activities of daily living. In the oculomotor literature, reaction times (RT) for a 'standard' and stimulus-driven (SD) prosaccade (i.e., saccade to target at target onset) are increased when preceded by a 'non-standard' antisaccade (i.e., saccade mirror-symmetrical to target at target onset), whereas the converse switch does not elicit an RT cost. The prosaccade switch-cost has been attributed to lingering neural activity-or task-set inertia-related to the antisaccade executive demands of response suppression and vector inversion. It is, however, unclear whether response suppression and/or vector inversion contribute to the prosaccade switch-cost. Experiment 1 of the present work had participants alternate (i.e., AABB paradigm) between minimally delayed (MD) pro- and antisaccades. MD saccades require a response after target extinction and necessitate response suppression for both pro- and antisaccades-a paradigm providing a framework to determine whether vector inversion contributes to a task-set inertia. In Experiment 2, participants alternated between SD pro- and MD antisaccades-a paradigm designed to determine if a switch-cost is selectively imparted when a SD and standard response is preceded by a non-standard response. Experiment 1 showed that RTs for MD pro- and antisaccades were refractory to the preceding trial-type; that is, vector inversion did not engender a switch-cost. Experiment 2 indicated that RTs for SD prosaccades were increased when preceded by an MD antisaccade. Accordingly, response suppression engenders a task-set inertia but only for a subsequent stimulus-driven and standard response (i.e., SD prosaccade). Such a result is in line with the view that response suppression is a hallmark feature of executive function.

Switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behaviour: A computational study of the antisaccade task

An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit stimulus-driven, habitual responses, in favour of complex, voluntary actions. In addition, humans can also alternate between different tasks. This comes at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same task, a phenomenon called the "task-switch cost." While task switching and inhibitory control have been studied extensively, the interaction between them has received relatively little attention. Here, we used the SERIA model, a computational model of antisaccade behaviour, to draw a bridge between them. We investigated task switching in two versions of the mixed antisaccade task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. SERIA revealed that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists onto the next trial, independently of the upcoming trial type. Moreover, switching between tasks induces slower and less accurate voluntary responses compared to repeat trials. However, this only occurs when participants lack the time to prepare the correct response. Altogether, SERIA demonstrates that there is a reconfiguration cost associated with switching between voluntary actions. In addition, the enhanced inhibition that follows antisaccade but not prosaccade trials explains asymmetric switch costs. In conclusion, SERIA offers a novel model of task switching that unifies previous theoretical accounts by distinguishing between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and could help explain similar phenomena in paradigms beyond the antisaccade task.

Response suppression produces a switch-cost for spatially compatible saccades

Executive function supports the rapid alternation between tasks for online reconfiguration of attentional and motor goals. The oculomotor literature has found that a prosaccade (i.e., saccade to veridical target location) preceded by an antisaccade (i.e., saccade mirror symmetrical to a target) elicits an increase in reaction time (RT), whereas the converse switch does not. This switch-cost has been attributed to the antisaccade task's requirement of inhibiting a prosaccade (i.e., response suppression) and transforming a target's coordinate (i.e., vector inversion)-executive processes thought to contribute to a task-set inertia that proactively interferes with the planning of a subsequent prosaccade. It is, however, unclear whether response suppression and vector inversion contribute to a task-set inertia or whether the phenomenon relates to a unitary component (e.g., response suppression). Here, the same stimulus-driven (SD) prosaccades (i.e., respond at target onset) as used in previous work were used with minimally delayed (MD) prosaccades (i.e., respond at target offset) and arranged in an AABB paradigm (i.e., A = SD prosaccade, B = MD prosaccade). MD prosaccades provide the same response suppression as antisaccades without the need for vector inversion. RTs for SD task-switch trials were longer and more variable than their task-repeat counterparts, whereas values for MD task-switch and task-repeat trials did not reliably differ. Moreover, SD task-repeat and task-switch movement times and amplitudes did not vary and thus demonstrate that a switch-cost is unrelated to a speed accuracy trade-off. Accordingly, results suggest the executive demands of response suppression is sufficient to engender the persistent activation of a non-standard task-set that selectively delays the planning of a subsequent SD prosaccade.

Contextual effects on cognitive control and BOLD activation in single versus mixed saccade tasks

The context or trial history of a task influences response efficiency in mixed paradigms based on cognitive control demands for task set selection. In the current study, the impact of context on prosaccade and antisaccade trials in single and mixed tasks was investigated with BOLD fMRI. Prosaccades require a look towards a newly appearing target, while antisaccades require cognitive control for prepotent response inhibition and generation of a saccade to the opposite location. Results indicated slower prosaccade reaction times and more antisaccade errors for switched than repeated or single trials, and slower antisaccade reaction times for single than mixed trials. BOLD activation was greater for the mixed than the single context in frontal eye fields and precuneus, while switch trials had greater activation than repeat trials in posterior parietal and middle occipital cortex. Greater antisaccade activation was observed overall in saccade circuitry, although effects were evident primarily for the mixed task when considered separately. Finally, an interaction was observed in superior frontal cortex, precuneus, anterior cingulate, and thalamus with strong responses for antisaccade switch trials in the latter two regions. Altogether this response pattern demonstrated the sensitivity of cognitive control to changing task conditions, especially due to task switching costs. Such context-specific differences highlight the importance of trial history when assessing cognitive control.

Alternating between pro- and antisaccades: switch-costs manifest via decoupling the spatial relations between stimulus and response

Antisaccades are a nonstandard task requiring a response mirror-symmetrical to the location of a target. The completion of an antisaccade has been shown to delay the reaction time (RT) of a subsequent prosaccade, whereas the converse switch elicits a null RT cost (i.e., the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost). The present study sought to determine whether the prosaccade switch-cost arises from low-level interference specific to the sensory features of a target (i.e., modality-dependent) or manifests via the high-level demands of dissociating the spatial relations between stimulus and response (i.e., modality-independent). Participants alternated between pro- and antisaccades wherein the target associated with the response alternated between visual and auditory modalities. Thus, the present design involved task-switch (i.e., switching from a pro- to antisaccade and vice versa) and modality-switch (i.e., switching from a visual to auditory target and vice versa) trials as well as their task- and modality-repetition counterparts. RTs were longer for modality-switch than modality-repetition trials. Notably, however, modality-switch trials did not nullify or lessen the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost; that is, the magnitude of the RT cost for task-switch prosaccades was equivalent across modality-switch and modality-repetition trials. Thus, competitive interference within a sensory modality does not contribute to the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost. Instead, the modality-independent findings evince that dissociating the spatial relations between stimulus and response instantiates a high-level and inertially persistent nonstandard task-set that impedes the planning of a subsequent prosaccade.

Task-switching effects for visual and auditory pro- and antisaccades: evidence for a task-set inertia

The completion of an antisaccade delays the reaction time (RT) of a subsequent prosaccade; however, the converse switch does not influence RT. In accounting for this result, the task-set inertia hypothesis contends that antisaccades engender a persistent nonstandard task-set that delays the planning of a subsequent prosaccade. In contrast, the coordinate system transformation hypothesis asserts that the transformation required to construct a mirror-symmetrical target representation persistently inhibits prosaccade planning. The authors tested the latter hypothesis by examining switch-costs for pro- and antisaccades directed to visual (i.e., the stimuli used in previous work) and auditory targets. Notably, auditory cues are specified in a head-centered frame of reference prior to their conversion into the retinocentric coordinates necessary for saccade output. Thus, if the coordinate system transformation hypothesis is correct then auditory pro- and antisaccades should elicit a bidirectional switch-cost because each requires a coordinate transformation. RTs for visual and auditory modalities showed a reliable--and equivalent magnitude--prosaccade switch-cost. Moreover, performance (e.g., movement time) and kinematic (e.g., velocity) variables indicated the switch-cost was restricted to response planning. As such, results are incompatible with the coordinate system transformation hypothesis and therefore provide convergent evidence that a task-set inertia contributes to the prosaccade switch-cost.

Trial-type probability and task-switching effects on behavioral response characteristics in a mixed saccade task

Eye movement circuitry involved in saccade production offers a model for studying cognitive control: visually guided prosaccades are stimulus-directed responses, while goal-driven antisaccades rely upon more complex control processes to inhibit the prepotent tendency to look toward a cue, transform its spatial location, and generate a volitional saccade in the opposite direction. By manipulating the relative probability of these saccade types, we measured participants' behavioral responses to different levels of implicit trial-type probability and task-switching demands in conditions with relatively long inter-trial fixation and trial-type cue lengths. Results indicated that when prosaccades were less probable in a run, more prosaccade errors were generated; however, for antisaccades, trial-type probability had no effect on the percent of correct responses. For reaction times, specifically in runs with a larger probability of antisaccade trials, latencies increased for both anti- and pro-saccades. Furthermore, task switching resulted in a lower percentage of correct responses on switched trials, but a prior antisaccade trial led to slower reaction times for both trial types (i.e., a task switch cost for prosaccades and switch benefit for antisaccades). These findings indicate that cognitive control demands and residual inhibition from antisaccades alter performance relative to trial-type probability and task switching within a run, with the prosaccade task showing greater susceptibility to the influence of a large probability of cognitively complex antisaccades.

Oculomotor task switching: alternating from a nonstandard to a standard response yields the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost

The completion of an antisaccade (i.e., a nonstandard task) lengthens the reaction time (RT) of a subsequent prosaccade: a behavioral phenomenon termed the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost. One explanation for the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost is suppressing a stimulus-driven prosaccade during the preceding antisaccade trial engenders a residual inhibition of the oculomotor networks that support prosaccade planning (i.e., the oculomotor inhibition hypothesis). Alternatively, the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost may reflect the persistent activation of the antisaccade's nonstandard task rules (i.e., task set), which delays the planning of the next prosaccade (i.e., task-set inertia hypothesis). To determine which hypothesis provides the most parsimonious account for the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost, participants alternated between pro- and antisaccades wherein task instructions (i.e., pro- and antisaccade) were provided before (i.e., classic cuing) or concurrent (i.e., delayed cuing) with response cuing. Importantly, pro- and antisaccades elicited via the delayed cuing condition required the suppression of a stimulus-driven prosaccade at response cuing (i.e., response suppression) to discern the appropriate to-be-performed task. Results showed that classic and delayed antisaccades, but not delayed prosaccades, lengthened the RT of subsequent prosaccades. That delayed prosaccades, which require response suppression for their successful execution, did not lengthen the RT of subsequent prosaccades indicates that the oculomotor inhibition hypothesis does not account for the unidirectional prosaccade switch-cost. Instead, the current findings are in line with the assertion that the task set associated with a nonstandard antisaccade persists inertially and delays the planning of a subsequent prosaccade (i.e., task-set inertia hypothesis).

Response suppression delays the planning of subsequent stimulus-driven saccades

The completion of an antisaccade selectively increases the reaction tiME (RT) of a subsequent prosaccade: a result that has been interpreted to reflect the residual inhibition of stimulus-driven saccade networks [1], [2]. In the present investigation we sought to determine whether the increase in prosaccade RT is contingent on the constituent antisaccade planning processes of response suppression and vector inversion or is limited to response suppression. To that end, in one block participants alternated between pro- and antisaccades after every second trial (task-switching block), and in another block participants completed a series of prosaccades that were randomly (and infrequently) interspersed with no-go catch-trials (go/no-go block). Notably, such a design provides a framework for disentangling whether response suppression and/or vector inversion delays the planning of subsequent prosaccades. As expected, results for the task-switching block showed that antisaccades selectively increased the RTs of subsequent prosaccades. In turn, results for the go/no-go block showed that prosaccade RTs were increased when preceded by a no-go catch-trial. Moreover, the magnitude of the RT 'cost' was equivalent across the task-switching and go/no-go blocks. That prosaccades preceded by an antisaccade or a no-go catch-trial produced equivalent RT costs indicates that the conjoint processes of response suppression and vector inversion do not drive the inhibition of saccade planning mechanisms. Rather, the present findings indicate that a general consequence of response suppression is a residual inhibition of stimulus-driven saccade networks.