Electrophysiological Response to the Informative Value of Feedback Revealed in a Segmented Wisconsin Card Sorting Test

Between Shifting and Feedback Processing in the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in Children with Developmental Language Disorder

Children with developmental language disorder (DLD) demonstrate deficits in executive functioning; however, the specific components of executive functioning that are affected in this population are not well understood. This study evaluated set shifting and feedback processing in a Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) performed by 24 children with and without DLD. The behavioral results revealed poorer performance by the DLD group in measures of accuracy, proportion of correct rule shifts, perseverative errors on shift trials, and proportion of effective responses to feedback. Electrophysiological measures (event-related potentials, or ERPs) indicated different patterns of response to negative feedback that signaled the need for rule shifting, with the DLD group showing a trend toward processing shift cues as negative feedback. Group differences were found in the processing of the first and last positive feedback, with overall stronger responses to positive feedback by children with DLD. However, both groups showed a similar pattern of diminished attention to positive feedback when rule learning was established. Taken together, children with DLD demonstrated the inefficient processing of negative feedback in the context of rule-shifting and difficulty in establishing and maintaining a rule.

Proactive and reactive control differ between task switching and response rule switching: Event-related potential evidence

The distinction between task-switching (T-switch) and response-rule switching (RR-switch) has been reported in previous studies. However, it is unclear whether the neural correlates of proactive and reactive control differ between T-switch and RR-switch. In this study, a modified cue-target task was adopted. When the cue in the current trial differed from that in the preceding trial in shape (or color), the participants had to perform a T-switch (or RR-switch). Otherwise, they performed the same task following the same response rule. The behavioral results showed that the switch cost was greater for the RR-switch than for the T-switch. The event-related potential results indicated that (1) for cues, the switch-positivity in the late positive component (LPC) (500-800 ms) was more enhanced for the RR-switch than for the T-switch over the central to parietal regions, reflecting increased proactive control for the RR-switch compared with the T-switch; (2) for targets, the P3 amplitude was more attenuated in the RR-switch than the T-switch over the central and parietal regions, reflecting increased reactive control for the RR-switch; and (3) under the T-switch, the switch-positivity in the cue-LPC was negatively correlated with accuracy cost, while under the RR-switch, the switch negativity in the target-P3 was positively correlated with the reaction time cost. These findings suggest that similar proactive and reactive control are recruited in the T-switch and RR-switch, whereas cognitive control efforts clearly differ between them, perhaps due to different sub-processes.

Reconfiguration of response rule is more difficult than that of task goal: Behavior and electrophysiological evidence

Previous studies have investigated the neural mechanisms underlying cognitive control by using the task-switching paradigm, but differentiation from response rule switching (RR-switch) remains poorly explored. In this study, a partial voluntary task-switching (VTS) paradigm was used to explore the electrophysiological differences between task switching (T-switch) and RR-switching. Participants were sequentially presented with Arabic numerals colored red or green. If the color in the current trial was the same as that in the previous trial, the participants had to perform the same task following the same response rule. Otherwise, they had to voluntarily switch tasks (e.g., from parity task to magnitude task) or switch response rules (e.g., from "pressing F for odd and J for even number' to 'pressing J for odd and F for even number"). The behavioral results indicated that RR-switch was infrequently selected, and the performance was less efficient than that of the T-switch. Event-related potential results showed that both T- and RR-switches elicited a larger switch-positivity in the P2 and P3 time windows than that in the repeat condition. Switch-positivity was larger for RR-switch than for T-switch over the frontal sites, suggesting that more attention and cognitive resources were required to update information for the RR-switch than for the T-switch. These findings suggest that in the VTS, the hierarchical relationship between task goals and response rules is relatively loose, resulting in the neural disassociation of task reconfiguration and response change.

A Predictive Processing Account of Card Sorting: Fast Proactive and Reactive Frontoparietal Cortical Dynamics during Inference and Learning of Perceptual Categories

For decades, a common assumption in cognitive neuroscience has been that prefrontal executive control is mainly engaged during target detection [Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25-42, 1990]. More recently, predictive processing theories of frontal function under the Bayesian brain hypothesis emphasize a key role of proactive control for anticipatory action selection (i.e., planning as active inference). Here, we review evidence of fast and widespread EEG and magnetoencephalographic fronto-temporo-parietal cortical activations elicited by feedback cues and target cards in the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. This evidence is best interpreted when considering negative and positive feedback as predictive cues (i.e., sensory outcomes) for proactively updating beliefs about unknown perceptual categories. Such predictive cues inform posterior beliefs about high-level hidden categories governing subsequent response selection at target onset. Quite remarkably, these new views concur with Don Stuss' early findings concerning two broad classes of P300 cortical responses evoked by feedback cues and target cards in a computerized Wisconsin Card Sorting Test analogue. Stuss' discussion of those P300 responses-in terms of the resolution of uncertainty about response (policy) selection as well as the participants' expectancies for future perceptual or motor activities and their timing-was prescient of current predictive processing and active (Bayesian) inference theories. From these new premises, a domain-general frontoparietal cortical network is rapidly engaged during two temporarily distinct stages of inference and learning of perceptual categories that underwrite goal-directed card sorting behavior, and they each engage prefrontal executive functions in fundamentally distinct ways.