Constraints associated with cognitive control and the stability-flexibility dilemma

One of the most compelling characteristics of controlled processing is our limitation to exercise it. Theories of control allocation account for such limitations by assuming a cost of control that constrains how much cognitive control is allocated to a task. However, this leaves open the question of why such a cost would exist in the first place. Here, we use neural network simulations to test the hypothesis that constraints on cognitive control may reflect an optimal solution to the stabilityflexibility dilemma: allocating more control to a task results in greater activation of its neural representation but also in greater persistence of this activity upon switching to a new task, yielding switch costs. We demonstrate that constraints on control impair performance of any given task but reduce performance costs associated with task switches. Critically, we show that optimal control constraints are higher in environments with a higher probability of task switches.

[1]  M. Husain,et al.  Reward Pays the Cost of Noise Reduction in Motor and Cognitive Control , 2015, Current Biology.

[2]  Angela L. Duckworth,et al.  An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[3]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The Expected Value of Control: An Integrative Theory of Anterior Cingulate Cortex Function , 2013, Neuron.

[4]  T. Goschke.  Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching , 2000 .

[5]  Luiz Pessoa,et al.  Reward Reduces Conflict by Enhancing Attentional Control and Biasing Visual Cortical Processing , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Toward a Rational and Mechanistic Account of Mental Effort. , 2017, Annual review of neuroscience.

[7]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Reward rate optimization in two-alternative decision making: empirical tests of theoretical predictions. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  James L. McClelland,et al.  On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. , 1990, Psychological review.

[9]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  On the Control of Control: The Role of Dopamine in Regulating Prefrontal Function and Working Memory , 2007 .

[10]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[11]  D. Alan Allport,et al.  SHIFTING INTENTIONAL SET - EXPLORING THE DYNAMIC CONTROL OF TASKS , 1994 .

[12]  P. Zelazo,et al.  What is Cognitive Control , 2013 .

[13]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[14]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Multitasking Capability Versus Learning Efficiency in Neural Network Architectures , 2017, CogSci.

[15]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Rational metareasoning and the plasticity of cognitive control , 2018, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[16]  C. N. Boehler,et al.  The influence of reward associations on conflict processing in the Stroop task , 2010, Cognition.

[17]  Hans Liljenström,et al.  Neural Stability and Flexibility: A Computational Approach , 2003, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[18]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. , 2006, Psychological review.

[19]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and cognitive control. , 1975 .

[20]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  On the Economy of the Human Processing System: A Model of Multiple Capacity. , 1977 .

[21]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Motivation and cognitive control: from behavior to neural mechanism. , 2015, Annual review of psychology.

[22]  David E. Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. , 1997 .

[23]  W. Newsome,et al.  Context-dependent computation by recurrent dynamics in prefrontal cortex , 2013, Nature.

[24]  Diana J. N. Armbruster,et al.  Stochastic Dynamics Underlying Cognitive Stability and Flexibility , 2015, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[25]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Controlled vs. Automatic Processing: A Graph-Theoretic Approach to the Analysis of Serial vs. Parallel Processing in Neural Network Architectures , 2016, CogSci.

[26]  Stephen Monsell,et al.  Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[28]  N. Meiran.  Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. , 1996 .

[29]  J D Cohen,et al.  Multitasking versus multiplexing: Toward a normative account of limitations in the simultaneous execution of control-demanding behaviors , 2014, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[30]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[31]  Roy Davis,et al.  Attention and performance in the workplace , 1999 .

[32]  J. Cohen,et al.  Dopamine, cognitive control, and schizophrenia: the gating model. , 1999, Progress in brain research.

[33]  Dario D. Salvucci,et al.  Threaded cognition: an integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. , 2008, Psychological review.

[34]  Ulrich Mayr,et al.  What matters in the cued task-switching paradigm: Tasks or cues? , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.