Neural control of enhanced filtering demands in a combined Flanker and Garner conflict task.

Several studies demonstrated that visual filtering mechanisms might underlie both conflict resolution of the Flanker conflict and the control of the Garner effect. However, it remains unclear whether the mechanisms involved in the processing of both effects depend on similar filter mechanisms, such that especially the Garner effect is able to modulate filtering needs in the Flanker conflict. In the present experiment twenty-four subjects participated in a combined Garner and Flanker task during two runs of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) recordings. Behavioral data showed a significant Flanker but no Garner effect. A run-wise analysis, however, revealed a Flanker effect in the Garner filtering condition in the first experimental run, while we found a Flanker effect in the Garner baseline condition in the second experimental run. The fMRI data revealed a fronto-parietal network involved in the processing of both types of effects. Flanker interference was associated with activity in the inferior frontal gyrus, the anterior cingulate cortex, the precuneus as well as the inferior (IPL) and superior parietal lobule (SPL). Garner interference was associated with activation in middle frontal and middle temporal gyrus, the lingual gyrus as well as the IPL and SPL. Interaction analyses between the Garner and the Flanker effect additionally revealed differences between the two experimental runs. In the first experimental run, activity specifically related to the interaction of effects was found in frontal and parietal regions, while in the second run we found activity in the hippocampus, the parahippocampal cortex and the basal ganglia. This shift in activity for the interaction effects might be associated with a task-related learning process to control filtering demands. Especially perceptual learning mechanisms might play a crucial role in the present Flanker and Garner task design and, therefore, increased performance in the second experimental run could be the reason for the lack of behavioral Garner interference on the level of the whole experiment.