21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Glancing and Then Looking: On the Role of Body, Affect, and Meaning in Cognitive Control

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In humans, there is a trade-off between the need to respond optimally to the salient environmental stimuli and the need to meet our long-term goals. This implies that a system of salience sensitive control exists, which trades task-directed processing off against monitoring and responding to potentially high salience stimuli that are irrelevant to the current task. Much cognitive control research has attempted to understand these mechanisms using non-affective stimuli. However, recent research has emphasized the importance of emotions, which are a major factor in the prioritization of competing stimuli and in directing attention. While relatively mature theories of cognitive control exist for non-affective settings, exactly how emotions modulate cognitive processes is less well understood. The attentional blink (AB) task is a useful experimental paradigm to reveal the dynamics of both cognitive and affective control in humans. Hence, we have developed the glance–look model, which has replicated a broad profile of data on the semantic AB task and characterized how attentional deployment is modulated by emotion. Taking inspiration from Barnard’s Interacting Cognitive Subsystems, the model relies on a distinction between two levels of meaning: implicational and propositional, which are supported by two corresponding mental subsystems: the glance and the look respectively. In our model, these two subsystems reflect the central engine of cognitive control and executive function. In particular, the interaction within the central engine dynamically establishes a task filter for salient stimuli using a neurobiologically inspired learning mechanism. In addition, the somatic contribution of emotional effects is modeled by a body-state subsystem. We argue that stimulus-driven interaction among these three subsystems governs the movement of control between them. The model also predicts attenuation effects and fringe awareness during the AB.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An introduction to latent semantic analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex.

            The somatic marker hypothesis provides a systems-level neuroanatomical and cognitive framework for decision making and the influence on it by emotion. The key idea of this hypothesis is that decision making is a process that is influenced by marker signals that arise in bioregulatory processes, including those that express themselves in emotions and feelings. This influence can occur at multiple levels of operation, some of which occur consciously and some of which occur non-consciously. Here we review studies that confirm various predictions from the hypothesis. The orbitofrontal cortex represents one critical structure in a neural system subserving decision making. Decision making is not mediated by the orbitofrontal cortex alone, but arises from large-scale systems that include other cortical and subcortical components. Such structures include the amygdala, the somatosensory/insular cortices and the peripheral nervous system. Here we focus only on the role of the orbitofrontal cortex in decision making and emotional processing, and the relationship between emotion, decision making and other cognitive functions of the frontal lobe, namely working memory.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning.

              We develop a theoretical framework that shows how mesencephalic dopamine systems could distribute to their targets a signal that represents information about future expectations. In particular, we show how activity in the cerebral cortex can make predictions about future receipt of reward and how fluctuations in the activity levels of neurons in diffuse dopamine systems above and below baseline levels would represent errors in these predictions that are delivered to cortical and subcortical targets. We present a model for how such errors could be constructed in a real brain that is consistent with physiological results for a subset of dopaminergic neurons located in the ventral tegmental area and surrounding dopaminergic neurons. The theory also makes testable predictions about human choice behavior on a simple decision-making task. Furthermore, we show that, through a simple influence on synaptic plasticity, fluctuations in dopamine release can act to change the predictions in an appropriate manner.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychology
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Research Foundation
                1664-1078
                20 December 2011
                2011
                : 2
                : 348
                Affiliations
                [1] 1simpleDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge Cambridge, UK
                [2] 2simpleMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit Cambridge, UK
                [3] 3simpleCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Cognitive Systems, University of Kent Canterbury, Kent, UK
                Author notes

                Edited by: Tom Verguts, Ghent University, Belgium

                Reviewed by: Kimberly Sarah Chiew, Washington University in St. Louis, USA; Robert Lowe, University of Skövde, Sweden

                *Correspondence: Li Su, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK. e-mail: ls514@ 123456cam.ac.uk

                This article was submitted to Frontiers in Cognition, a specialty of Frontiers in Psychology.

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00348
                3243077
                22194729
                5f1505b9-6e2f-4aa7-a415-d5f7e56b7acd
                Copyright © 2011 Su, Bowman and Barnard.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited.

                History
                : 01 August 2011
                : 04 November 2011
                Page count
                Figures: 15, Tables: 4, Equations: 4, References: 85, Pages: 23, Words: 17456
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                emotion,attentional blink,computational modeling,body-state,cognitive control

                Comments

                Comment on this article