General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilian-University, D-80802 Munich, Germany
General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilian-University, D-80802 Munich, Germany.
J Neurosci. 2021 Feb 24;41(8):1788-1801. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1682-20.2020. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
Cognitive control helps us to overcome task interference in challenging situations. Resolving conflicts because of interfering influences is believed to rely on midfrontal theta oscillations. However, different sources of interference necessitate different types of control. Attentional control is needed to suppress salient distractors. Motor control is needed to suppress goal-incompatible action impulses. While previous studies mostly studied the additive effects of attentional and motor conflicts, we independently manipulated the need for attentional control (via visual distractors) and motor control (via unexpected response deviations) in an EEG study with male and female humans. We sought to find out whether these different types of control rely on the same midfrontal oscillatory mechanisms. Motor conflicts, but not attentional conflicts, elicited increases in midfrontal theta power during conflict resolution. Independent of the type of conflict, theta power was predictive of motor slowing. Connectivity analysis via phase-based synchronization indicated a widespread increase interbrain connectivity for motor conflicts, but a midfrontal-to-posterior decrease in connectivity for attentional conflicts. For each condition, we found stronger midfrontal connectivity with the parietal region contralateral to, rather than ipsilateral to, the acting hand. Parietal lateralization in connectivity was strongest for motor conflicts. Previous studies suggested that midfrontal theta oscillations might represent a general control mechanism, which aids conflict resolution independent of the conflict domain. In contrast, our results show that oscillatory theta dynamics during reactive control mostly reflect motor-related adjustments. Humans need to exercise self-control over both their attention (to avoid distraction) and their motor activity (to suppress inappropriate action impulses). Midfrontal theta oscillations have been assumed to indicate a general control mechanism, which help to exert top-down control during both motor and sensory interference. We are using a novel approach for the independent manipulation of attentional and motor control to show that increases in midfrontal theta power and brainwide connectivity are linked to the top-down adjustments of motor responses, not sensory interference. These findings clarify the function of midfrontal theta dynamics as a key aspect of neural top-down control and help to dissociate domain-general from motor-specific aspects of self-control.
认知控制帮助我们在具有挑战性的情况下克服任务干扰。人们认为，解决因干扰影响而产生的冲突依赖于前额theta 振荡。然而，不同的干扰源需要不同类型的控制。注意力控制需要抑制突出的分心物。运动控制需要抑制目标不兼容的动作冲动。虽然之前的研究大多研究了注意力和运动冲突的附加效应，但我们在一项男性和女性人类的脑电图研究中独立地操纵了注意力控制（通过视觉分心物）和运动控制（通过意外的反应偏差）的需求。我们试图找出这些不同类型的控制是否依赖于相同的前额振荡机制。在冲突解决过程中，只有运动冲突而不是注意力冲突引起前额 theta 功率的增加。无论冲突类型如何，theta 功率都与运动减速有关。通过基于相位的同步的连接分析表明，运动冲突会导致大脑间连接广泛增加，而注意力冲突则导致前额与后部之间的连接减少。对于每种情况，我们都发现与作用手对侧的顶叶区域的前额连接更强，而不是同侧的顶叶区域。对于运动冲突，连接中的顶叶偏侧化最强。之前的研究表明，前额 theta 振荡可能代表一种通用的控制机制，可以帮助解决独立于冲突域的冲突。相比之下，我们的结果表明，反应性控制过程中振荡 theta 动力学主要反映了与运动相关的调整。人类需要对注意力（避免分心）和运动活动（抑制不适当的动作冲动）进行自我控制。前额 theta 振荡被认为是一种通用的控制机制，有助于在运动和感官干扰过程中进行自上而下的控制。我们使用一种新的方法来独立地操纵注意力和运动控制，以表明前额 theta 功率和大脑连接的增加与运动反应的自上而下调整有关，而与感官干扰无关。这些发现阐明了前额 theta 动力学作为神经自上而下控制的关键方面的功能，并有助于区分自我控制的通用和特定于运动的方面。
