4.7 Article

Neural correlates of switching set as measured in fast, event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging

期刊

HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 247-256

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20007

关键词

set switching; set shifting; cognitive flexibility; dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC)

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Attentional switching has shown to involve several prefrontal and parietal brain regions. Most cognitive paradigms used to measure cognitive switching such as the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (WCST) involve additional cognitive processes besides switching, in particular working memory (WM). It is, therefore, questionable whether prefrontal brain regions activated in these conditions, especially dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), are involved in cognitive switching per se, or are related to WM components involved in switching tasks. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to examine neural correlates of pure switching using a paradigm purposely designed to minimize WM functions. The switching paradigm required subjects to switch unpredictably between two spatial dimensions, clearly indicated throughout the task before each trial. Fast, event-related fMRI was used to compare neural activation associated with switch trials to that related to repeat trials in 20 healthy, right-handed, adult males. A large cluster of activation was observed in the right hemisphere, extending from inferior prefrontal and pre- and postcentral gyri to superior temporal and inferior parietal cortices. A smaller and more caudal cluster of homologous activation in the left hemisphere was accompanied by activation of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). We conclude that left DLPFC activation is involved directly in cognitive switching, in conjunction with parietal and temporal brain regions. Pre- and postcentral gyrus activation may be related to motor components of switching set. (C) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据