Dissociating Proactive and Reactive Cognitive Control Processes

分离主动和反应认知控制过程

• 批准号: RGPIN-2018-04998
• 负责人: Goghari, Vina
• 金额: $ 4.23万
• 依托单位: University of Toronto
• 依托单位国家: 加拿大
• 项目类别: Discovery Grants Program - Individual
• 财政年份: 2022
• 资助国家: 加拿大
• 起止时间: 2022-01-01 至 2023-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/ase-oro/Details-Detailles_eng.asp?id=764213
• 关键词: Dissociating; Proactive; Reactive; Cognitive; Control

Historically, cognitive control was conceptualized as a unitary concept, defined predominantly as a top-down process' that controlled lower-level sensory, motor, and memory operations to engage in coordinated, purposeful behaviour. More recently, an influential revision posits that cognitive control is not a single construct, but rather may have different modes, proactive and reactive, which are dissociable. Proactive control is associated with the active maintenance of task-relevant information to perform the appropriate response. By actively maintaining this information, “top-down control” can be executed and other systems can be biased towards task-relevant information. Reactive control, in contrast, would be engaged after rather than before the event requiring the control. This system would be more influenced by “bottom-up processes.” Under such a control strategy, initial task-relevant information would be processed transiently. Greater sustained activity in the lateral prefrontal cortex is hypothesized to play a central role in the active maintenance and updating of relevant information. In comparison, for reactive control, the lateral prefrontal cortex is involved transiently, and other brain regions are more involved. The limited number of studies evaluating this new theory have found evidence that proactive and reactive control processes can be differentiated and help to explain the heterogeneity in behaviour and neural mechanisms from previous studies. However, a number of key questions still remain to better understand the variability in cognitive control and the two modes, including under what condition each type of control is more likely to present, and the brain networks involved. Goal-directed activities are fundamental to human behaviour. Some of the variability and unreliability in behavioural and neuroimaging findings may be due to the unified view of cognitive control, and better understanding the dual mechanisms of control may further this important area of cognitive science. Last, investigating proactive and reactive control also has implications for neurological and psychological disorders; if deficits are more likely to present in one mode versus another in certain impaired populations, increasing reliance on the more spared mode may improve goal-directed behaviour and wellness.

从历史上看，认知控制被概念化为一个单一的概念，主要被定义为一个自上而下的过程，控制较低层次的感觉，运动和记忆操作，以参与协调，有目的的行为。最近，一个有影响力的修正假设，认知控制不是一个单一的结构，而是可能有不同的模式，主动和反应，这是分离的。主动控制与任务相关信息的主动维护相关联，以执行适当的响应。通过主动维护这些信息，可以执行“自上而下的控制”，并且其他系统可以偏向于任务相关的信息。相反，反应性控制将在需要控制的事件之后而不是之前进行。这一制度将更多地受到“自下而上进程”的影响。在这种控制策略下，初始任务相关信息将被瞬时处理。更大的持续活动，在外侧前额叶皮层假设发挥了积极的维护和更新相关信息的核心作用。相比之下，对于反应性控制，外侧前额叶皮层暂时参与，其他大脑区域参与更多。评估这一新理论的有限数量的研究发现，主动和反应性控制过程可以区分，并有助于解释以前研究中的行为和神经机制的异质性。然而，一些关键问题仍然存在，以更好地理解认知控制和两种模式的可变性，包括在什么条件下每种类型的控制更有可能出现，以及所涉及的大脑网络。以目标为导向的活动是人类行为的根本。行为和神经影像学研究结果中的一些变异性和不可靠性可能是由于认知控制的统一观点，更好地理解控制的双重机制可能会进一步推动认知科学的这一重要领域。最后，研究主动和反应控制也对神经和心理障碍有影响;如果在某些受损人群中，一种模式比另一种模式更有可能出现缺陷，那么增加对更备用模式的依赖可能会改善目标导向的行为和健康。