Van Gerven Pascal W M, Hurks Petra P M, Adam Jos J
School of Health Professions Education (SHE), Department of Educational Development & Research, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Department of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2017 Sep;179:78-88. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.07.005. Epub 2017 Jul 22.
We investigated two components of proactive cognitive control, response facilitation and response inhibition, in an adult lifespan sample (N=544, age range=18-91years) by administering two response-preparation tasks: a procue task, primarily involving facilitation, and an anticue task, involving both facilitation and inhibition. Cues in both tasks corresponded with the index and middle fingers of either the left or right hand. After a random preparation interval (PI) of 100-850ms following the onset of the cue signal, a single-target stimulus indicated the required response. Where procues were spatially aligned with the two fingers of the responding hand, anticues consistently indicated the two fingers of the opposite hand, requiring a remapping of cue location and response hand. This remapping requires inhibition to suppress the automatic activation of the ipsilateral responses. Previous research revealed typical reaction time (RT) profiles for procues and anticues as a function of PI. Whereas procues generate RT benefits (relative to a neutral-cue condition) already at short PIs, which increase with longer PIs, anticues generate RT costs at short PIs and RT benefits at longer PIs. Our results showed that, in the anticue task, older participants needed more preparation time to turn RT costs into RT benefits than younger participants, revealing an age-related deficit of response inhibition. Moreover, in both tasks, older participants were less able to increase RT benefits with longer PIs, revealing a deficit of response facilitation. We conclude that both facilitatory and inhibitory impairments contribute to age-related deficiencies in proactive cognitive control.
我们通过实施两项反应准备任务，对一个成年寿命样本（N = 544，年龄范围 = 18 - 91岁）中的主动认知控制的两个组成部分，即反应促进和反应抑制进行了研究：一项前线索任务，主要涉及促进作用；以及一项反线索任务，涉及促进和抑制作用。两项任务中的线索都与左手或右手的食指和中指相对应。在提示信号出现后经过100 - 850毫秒的随机准备间隔（PI），一个单目标刺激指示所需的反应。在前线索与反应手的两个手指在空间上对齐的情况下，反线索始终指示相反手的两个手指，这需要重新映射线索位置和反应手。这种重新映射需要抑制作用来抑制同侧反应的自动激活。先前的研究揭示了前线索和反线索作为PI函数的典型反应时间（RT）曲线。前线索在短PI时就已经产生RT益处（相对于中性线索条件），并随着PI变长而增加，而反线索在短PI时产生RT代价，在长PI时产生RT益处。我们的结果表明，在反线索任务中，老年参与者比年轻参与者需要更多的准备时间才能将RT代价转化为RT益处，这揭示了与年龄相关的反应抑制缺陷。此外，在两项任务中，老年参与者都不太能够随着PI变长而增加RT益处，这揭示了反应促进方面的缺陷。我们得出结论，促进和抑制方面的损伤都导致了与年龄相关的主动认知控制缺陷。
