1
|
Geddert R, Egner T. No need to choose: Independent regulation of cognitive stability and flexibility challenges the stability-flexibility trade-off. J Exp Psychol Gen 2022; 151:3009-3027. [PMID: 35617233 PMCID: PMC9670017 DOI: 10.1037/xge0001241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Adaptive behavior requires the ability to focus on a current task and protect it from distraction (cognitive stability), as well as the ability to rapidly switch to another task in light of changing circumstances (cognitive flexibility). Cognitive stability and flexibility have been conceptualized as opposite endpoints on a stability-flexibility trade-off continuum, implying an obligatory reciprocity between the two: Greater flexibility necessitates less stability, and vice versa. Surprisingly, rigorous empirical tests of this critical assumption are lacking. Here, we acquired simultaneous measurements of cognitive stability (congruency effects) and flexibility (switch costs) on the same stimuli within the same task while independently varying contextual demands on these functions with block-wise manipulations of the proportion of incongruent trials and task switches, respectively. If cognitive stability and flexibility are reciprocal, increases in flexibility in response to higher switch rates should lead to commensurate decreases in stability, and increases in stability in response to more frequent incongruent trials should result in decreased flexibility. Across three experiments, using classic cued task-switching (Experiments 1 and 3) and attentional set-shifting (Experiment 2) protocols, we found robust evidence against an obligatory stability-flexibility trade-off. Although we observed the expected contextual adaptation of stability and flexibility to changing demands, strategic adjustments in stability had little influence on flexibility, and vice versa. These results refute the long-held assumption of a stability-flexibility trade-off, documenting instead that the cognitive processes mediating these functions can be regulated independently-it is possible to be both stable and flexible at the same time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raphael Geddert
- Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham,
NC, USA
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University,
Durham, NC, USA
| | - Tobias Egner
- Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham,
NC, USA
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University,
Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhang C, Beste C, Prochazkova L, Wang K, Speer SPH, Smidts A, Boksem MAS, Hommel B. Resting-state BOLD signal variability is associated with individual differences in metacontrol. Sci Rep 2022; 12:18425. [PMID: 36319653 PMCID: PMC9626555 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-21703-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
Numerous studies demonstrate that moment-to-moment neural variability is behaviorally relevant and beneficial for tasks and behaviors requiring cognitive flexibility. However, it remains unclear whether the positive effect of neural variability also holds for cognitive persistence. Moreover, different brain variability measures have been used in previous studies, yet comparisons between them are lacking. In the current study, we examined the association between resting-state BOLD signal variability and two metacontrol policies (i.e., persistence vs. flexibility). Brain variability was estimated from resting-state fMRI (rsfMRI) data using two different approaches (i.e., Standard Deviation (SD), and Mean Square Successive Difference (MSSD)) and metacontrol biases were assessed by three metacontrol-sensitive tasks. Results showed that brain variability measured by SD and MSSD was highly positively related. Critically, higher variability measured by MSSD in the attention network, parietal and frontal network, frontal and ACC network, parietal and motor network, and higher variability measured by SD in the parietal and motor network, parietal and frontal network were associated with reduced persistence (or greater flexibility) of metacontrol (i.e., larger Stroop effect or worse RAT performance). These results show that the beneficial effect of brain signal variability on cognitive control depends on the metacontrol states involved. Our study highlights the importance of temporal variability of rsfMRI activity in understanding the neural underpinnings of cognitive control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chenyan Zhang
- grid.5132.50000 0001 2312 1970Cognitive Psychology Unit, Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Christian Beste
- grid.4488.00000 0001 2111 7257Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany ,grid.4488.00000 0001 2111 7257University Neuropsychology Center, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany ,grid.410585.d0000 0001 0495 1805School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China
| | - Luisa Prochazkova
- grid.5132.50000 0001 2312 1970Cognitive Psychology Unit, Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Kangcheng Wang
- grid.410585.d0000 0001 0495 1805School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China
| | - Sebastian P. H. Speer
- grid.419918.c0000 0001 2171 8263Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16750.350000 0001 2097 5006Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Ale Smidts
- grid.6906.90000000092621349Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten A. S. Boksem
- grid.6906.90000000092621349Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bernhard Hommel
- grid.5132.50000 0001 2312 1970Cognitive Psychology Unit, Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands ,grid.4488.00000 0001 2111 7257Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany ,grid.410585.d0000 0001 0495 1805School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China
| |
Collapse
|