Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24309262›Full record

ReviewProgress in brain research2013

A cognitive framework for understanding and improving interference resolution in the brain.

Jyoti Mishra, Joaquin A Anguera, David A Ziegler, Adam Gazzaley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in brain research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Positive impacts of early auditory training on cortical processing at an older age.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Accessible online neuroplasticity-targeted training for children with ADHD.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jyoti MishraDepartments of Neurology, Physiology and Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: jyoti@gazzaleylab.ucsf.edu.
Joaquin A Anguera
David A Ziegler
Adam Gazzaley

Funding

Fogarty International Clinical Research Scholars Support Center @ Vanderbilt-AAMCR24TW007988 · FIC · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI VERMUND, STEN H. · 2007 to 2011
$27.6M
Neural Mechanisms Underlying Cognitive AgingR01AG030395 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GAZZALEY, ADAM H · 2008 to 2012
$2.0M
Neural Mechanisms of Learning to Resolve Interference in Younger and Older AdultsR01AG040333 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GAZZALEY, ADAM H · 2012 to 2016
$1.2M
Mechanisms of self-regulation of internal distractionR21AG041071 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GAZZALEY, ADAM H · 2011 to 2012
$382k
FIC NIH HHS 5R24TW007988-05FIC NIH HHS R24 TW007988NIA NIH HHS 5R01AG030395NIA NIH HHS 5R01AG0403333NIA NIH HHS 5R21AG041071NIA NIH HHS R01 AG030395NIA NIH HHS R01 AG040333NIA NIH HHS R21 AG041071
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

All of us are familiar with the negative impact of interference on achieving our task goals. We are referring to interference by information, which either impinges on our senses from an external environmental source or is internally generated by our thoughts. Informed by more than a decade of research on the cognitive and neural processing of interference, we have developed a framework for understanding how interference impacts our neural systems and especially how it is regulated and suppressed during efficient on-task performance. Importantly, externally and internally generated interferences have distinct neural signatures, and further, distinct neural processing emerges depending on whether individuals must ignore and suppress the interference, as for distractions, or engage with them in a secondary task, as during multitasking. Here, we elaborate on this cognitive framework and how it changes throughout the human lifespan, focusing mostly on research evidence from younger adults and comparing these findings to data from older adults, children, and cognitively impaired populations. With insights gleaned from our growing understanding, we then describe three novel translational efforts in our lab directed at improving distinct aspects of interference resolution using cognitive training. Critically, these training approaches were specifically developed to target improved interference resolution based on neuroplasticity principles and have shown much success in randomized controlled first version evaluations in healthy aging. Our results show not only on-task training improvements but also robust generalization of benefit to other cognitive control abilities. This research showcases how an in-depth understanding of neural mechanisms can then inform the development of effective deficit-targeted interventions, which can in turn benefit both healthy and cognitively impaired populations.

Indexed as

AgingAttentionBrainCognitionHumansNeuronal Plasticityagingattentioncognitive controlcognitive trainingdistractioninterferencemultitaskingneuroplasticity

Identifiers

PMID24309262
PMCPMC4067257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.