Resolving conflict: A response to Martin and Cheng (2006)

Martin and Cheng (2006) report the results of an experiment aimed at disentangling the effects of association strength from those of competition on performance on a verb generation task. Their experiment is situated at the center of a putative debate regarding the function of the left inferior frontal gyrus in language processing (see, e.g., Wagner, Paré-Blagoev, Clark, & Poldrack, 2001). Following in this tradition, Martin and Cheng purport to contrast two processes—selection between competing representations and controlled retrieval of weak associates—that we argue can be reduced to the same mechanism. We contend that the distinction between competition and association strength is a false dichotomy, and we attempt to recast this discussion within a Bayesian framework in an attempt to guide research in this area in a more fruitful direction.

[1]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Dissociable Controlled Retrieval and Generalized Selection Mechanisms in Ventrolateral Prefrontal Cortex , 2005, Neuron.

[2]  R. Zemel,et al.  Inference and computation with population codes. , 2003, Annual review of neuroscience.

[3]  W. Levelt,et al.  Semantic distance effects on object and action naming , 2002, Cognition.

[4]  L. Cipolotti,et al.  Dynamic aphasia: an inability to select between competing verbal responses? , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[5]  Thomas A. Schreiber,et al.  The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[6]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Modeling Response Times for Two-Choice Decisions , 1998 .

[7]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. , 2001, Psychological review.

[8]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  Selection from perceptual and conceptual representations , 2004, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

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

[10]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  Effects of Repetition and Competition on Activity in Left Prefrontal Cortex during Word Generation , 1999, Neuron.

[11]  M. Farah,et al.  Role of left inferior prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: a reevaluation. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Randi C. Martin,et al.  Dissociations among tasks involving inhibition: A single-case study , 2005, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[13]  Irene P. Kan,et al.  Verb generation in patients with focal frontal lesions: a neuropsychological test of neuroimaging findings. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  D. Nelson,et al.  What is preexisting strength? Predicting free association probabilities, similarity ratings, and cued recall probabilities , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  W. Newsome,et al.  Neural basis of a perceptual decision in the parietal cortex (area LIP) of the rhesus monkey. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  S. Thompson-Schill,et al.  The frontal lobes and the regulation of mental activity , 2005, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[17]  Randi C. Martin,et al.  Selection demands versus association strength in the verb generation task , 2006 .

[18]  R. Desimone,et al.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[19]  J. Gold,et al.  Neural computations that underlie decisions about sensory stimuli , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[20]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Recovering Meaning Left Prefrontal Cortex Guides Controlled Semantic Retrieval , 2001, Neuron.

[21]  J. Cohen,et al.  The role of locus coeruleus in the regulation of cognitive performance. , 1999, Science.