ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2022
Dissociating the Neural Correlates of Planning and Executing Tasks with Nested Task Sets.
Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamically shifting from compositional to conjunctive brain representations supports cognitive task learning.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Negative affect-driven impulsivity as hierarchical model-based overgeneralization.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Task processing (e.g., the preparation and execution of responses) and task representation (e.g., the activation and maintenance of stimulus-response and context information) are two facets of cognitive control supported by lateral frontal cortex (LFC). However, the mechanistic overlap (or distinction) between these two facets is unknown. We explored this by combining a complex task mapping with a precueing procedure. Participants made match/nonmatch judgments on pairs of stimuli during fMRI recording. Precues on each trial gave variable amounts of information to the participant in anticipation of the stimulus. Our results demonstrated that regions throughout LFC were more active at the stimulus (when responses could be executed) than at the cue (when they could only be prepared), indicating that they supported execution of the task agnostic to the specific task representation. A subset of regions in the left caudal LFC showed increased activity with more cue information at the cue and the reverse at the stimulus, suggesting their involvement in reducing uncertainty within the task representation. These results suggest that one component of task processing is preparing and executing the task according to the relevant representation, confined to left caudal LFC, whereas nonrepresentational functions that occur primarily during execution are supported by different regions throughout the rest of LFC. We further conducted an exploratory investigation of connectivity between the two groups of regions in this study and their potential relationship to the frontoparietal and cingulo-opercular networks. Regions with both patterns of activity appear to be part of the frontoparietal network.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.