Rasa Gulbinaite

Dissociable mechanisms underlying individual differences in visual working memory capacity

Individuals scoring relatively high on measures of working memory tend to be more proficient at controlling attention to minimize the effect of distracting information. It is currently unknown whether such superior attention control abilities are mediated by stronger suppression of irrelevant information, enhancement of relevant information, or both. Here we used steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) with the Eriksen flanker task to track simultaneously the attention to relevant and irrelevant information by tagging target and distractors with different frequencies. This design allowed us to dissociate attentional biasing of perceptual processing (via SSVEPs) and stimulus processing in the frontal cognitive control network (via time-frequency analyses of EEG data). We show that while preparing for the upcoming stimulus, high- and low-WMC individuals use different strategies: High-WMC individuals show attentional suppression of the irrelevant stimuli, whereas low-WMC individuals demonstrate attentional enhancement of the relevant stimuli. Moreover, behavioral performance was predicted by trial-to-trial fluctuations in strength of distractor-suppression for high-WMC participants. We found no evidence for WMC-related differences in cognitive control network functioning, as measured by midfrontal theta-band power. Taken together, these findings suggest that early suppression of irrelevant information is a key underlying neural mechanism by which superior attention control abilities are implemented.

Fronto-parietal network oscillations reveal relationship between working memory capacity and cognitive control

Executive-attention theory proposes a close relationship between working memory capacity (WMC) and cognitive control abilities. However, conflicting results are documented in the literature, with some studies reporting that individual variations in WMC predict differences in cognitive control and trial-to-trial control adjustments (operationalized as the size of the congruency effect and congruency sequence effects, respectively), while others report no WMC-related differences. We hypothesized that brain network dynamics might be a more sensitive measure of WMC-related differences in cognitive control abilities. Thus, in the present study, we measured human EEG during the Simon task to characterize WMC-related differences in the neural dynamics of conflict processing and adaptation to conflict. Although high- and low-WMC individuals did not differ behaviorally, there were substantial WMC-related differences in theta (4–8 Hz) and delta (1–3 Hz) connectivity in fronto-parietal networks. Group differences in local theta and delta power were relatively less pronounced. These results suggest that the relationship between WMC and cognitive control abilities is more strongly reflected in large-scale oscillatory network dynamics than in spatially localized activity or in behavioral task performance.

Five methodological challenges in cognitive electrophysiology

Here we discuss five methodological challenges facing the current cognitive electrophysiology literature that address the roles of brain oscillations in cognition. The challenges focus on (1) unambiguous and consistent terminology, (2) neurophysiologically meaningful interpretations of results, (3) evaluation and comparison of different spatial filters often used in M/EEG research, (4) the role of multiscale interactions in brain and cognitive function, and (5) development of biophysically plausible cognitive models. We also suggest research directions that will help address these challenges. We hope that this paper will help foster discussions and debates about important themes in the study of how the brains rhythmic patterns of spatiotemporal electrophysiological activity support cognition.

Rhythmic entrainment source separation: Optimizing analyses of neural responses to rhythmic sensory stimulation

ABSTRACT Steady‐state evoked potentials (SSEPs) are rhythmic brain responses to rhythmic sensory stimulation, and are often used to study perceptual and attentional processes. We present a data analysis method for maximizing the signal‐to‐noise ratio of the narrow‐band steady‐state response in the frequency and time‐frequency domains. The method, termed rhythmic entrainment source separation (RESS), is based on denoising source separation approaches that take advantage of the simultaneous but differential projection of neural activity to multiple electrodes or sensors. Our approach is a combination and extension of existing multivariate source separation methods. We demonstrate that RESS performs well on both simulated and empirical data, and outperforms conventional SSEP analysis methods based on selecting electrodes with the strongest SSEP response, as well as several other linear spatial filters. We also discuss the potential confound of overfitting, whereby the filter captures noise in absence of a signal. Matlab scripts are available to replicate and extend our simulations and methods. We conclude with some practical advice for optimizing SSEP data analyses and interpreting the results. HIGHLIGHTSSteady‐state evoked potentials are neural responses to rhythmic sensory stimuli.We present a spatial filtering method (termed RESS) that optimizes EEG SSEP analyses.RESS boosts signal‐to‐noise and accurately reconstructs simulated SSEP time courses.RESS detects temporal nonstationarities, thus increasing experiment flexibility.

Working memory capacity predicts conflict-task performance

The relationship between the ability to maintain task goals and working memory capacity (WMC) is firmly established, but evidence for WMC-related differences in conflict processing is mixed. We investigated whether WMC (measured using two complex-span tasks) mediates differences in adjustments of cognitive control in response to conflict. Participants performed a Simon task in which congruent and incongruent trials were equiprobable, but in which the proportion of congruency repetitions (congruent trials followed by congruent trials or incongruent trials followed by incongruent trials) and thus the need for trial-by-trial adjustments in cognitive control varied by block. The overall Simon effect did not depend on WMC capacity. However, for the low-WMC participants the Simon effect decreased as the proportion of congruency repetitions decreased, whereas for the high- and average-WMC participants it was relatively constant across conditions. Distribution analysis of the Simon effect showed more evidence for the inhibition of stimulus location in the low- than in the high-WMC participants, especially when the proportion of congruency repetitions was low. We hypothesize that low-WMC individuals exhibit more interference from task-irrelevant information due to weaker preparatory control prior to stimulus presentation and, thus, stronger reliance on reactive recruitment of cognitive control.

Performance Monitoring and Error-related Brain Activity

Everyone knows how easy it is to mistype words when under time pressure or when emotions run high, has felt the embarrassment of a slip of the tongue, or has had to clean up after adding water to a coffee maker twice or forgetting to replace a filter. These so-called slips of action are generally detected immediately and corrected without any additional feedback for the simple reason that the outcome of a slip violates the intention of the actor. In this respect, action slips differ from what are termed in the human factors/ergonomics literature mistakes, and which originate from incorrect assessment of a situation or failures to select an appropriate goal or means to achieve it. That is, mistakes can be seen as failures to select an appropriate plan, and slips as failures to execute such a plan (Fedota & Parasuraman, 2010).

VARIATIONS IN WORKING MEMORY CAPACITY: SUPPRESSION OF DISTRACTORS OR ENHANCEMENT OF TARGETS?

General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact openaccess@ed.ac.uk providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.