Abstract
The congruency sequence effect (CSE) reflected by the influence of the congruency of the previous trial on the current one translates improved cognitive control (CC). Yet, it remains debated whether reactive or proactive control processes mostly contribute to this effect. To address this question, we administered a Stroop task controlling for effects of feature repetition and contingency learning to a large group of participants, where we manipulated the frequency of incongruent trials in a block-wise fashion to induce either proactive (high-conflict frequency) or reactive (low-conflict frequency) control. Moreover, as the presentation of trial-by-trial evaluative feedback could influence control processes operating at a local level, we compared effect of evaluative vs. neutral feedback on the CSE, for each control mode separately. We tested the prediction that CSE should be influenced by conflict frequency and feedback type concurrently. Results showed that when evaluative feedback was used, the CSE was increased if conflict frequency was low, confirming that the CSE stemmed from reactive control mainly. If conflict frequency was high, a different sequence effect was observed. The use of neutral feedback abolished the modulation of the CSE by conflict frequency. Moreover, correlation results showed that reappraisal, corresponding to a proactive emotion regulation strategy, was negatively related to the CSE in this condition, suggesting that proactive control can alleviate the reactive dominance of the CSE. Altogether, these results suggest that CC is flexible, and its expression depends on the subtle balance between proactive and reactive control processes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aarts, E., Roelofs, A., & Van Turennout, M. (2008). Anticipatory activity in anterior cingulate cortex can be independent of conflict and error likelihood. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(18), 4671–4678. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4400-07.2008.
Aarts, K., & Pourtois, G. (2010). Anxiety not only increases, but also alters early error-monitoring functions. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 10(4), 479–492. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.10.4.479.
Abrahamse, E., Braem, S., Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2016). Grounding cognitive control in associative learning. Psychological Bulletin, 142(7), 693. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000047.
Alexander, W. H., & Brown, J. W. (2010). Computational models of performance monitoring and cognitive control. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(4), 658–677. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01085.x.
Alpay, G., Goerke, M., & Stürmer, B. (2009). Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation. Psychological Research PRPF, 73(6), 803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0196-9.
Appelbaum, L. G., Boehler, C. N., Davis, L. A., Won, R. J., & Woldorff, M. G. (2014). The dynamics of proactive and reactive cognitive control processes in the human brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(5), 1021–1038. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00542.
Blais, C., & Bunge, S. (2010). Behavioral and neural evidence for item-specific performance monitoring. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(12), 2758–2767. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21365.
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624.
Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(12), 539–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.003.
Braem, S., Verguts, T., Roggeman, C., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Reward modulates adaptations to conflict. Cognition, 125(2), 324–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.015.
Braver, T. S. (2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: a dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010.
Braver, T. S., Cole, M. W., & Yarkoni, T. (2010). Vive les differences! Individual variation in neural mechanisms of executive control. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20(2), 242–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2010.03.002.
Braver, T. S., Gray, J. R., & Burgess, G. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In Variation in Working Memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Braver, T. S., Paxton, J. L., Locke, H. S., & Barch, D. M. (2009). Flexible neural mechanisms of cognitive control within human prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(18), 7351–7356. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0808187106.
Bugg, J. M. (2012). Dissociating levels of cognitive control: the case of Stroop interference. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(5), 302–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412453586.
Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Toth, J. P. (2008). Multiple levels of control in the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition, 36(8), 1484–1494. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.8.1484.
Burgess, G. C., & Braver, T. S. (2010). Neural mechanisms of interference control in working memory: effects of interference expectancy and fluid intelligence. PloS One, 5(9), e12861. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012861.
Campbell, J. I., & Thompson, V. A. (2012). MorePower 6.0 for ANOVA with relational confidence intervals and Bayesian analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 1255–1265. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0186-0.
Correa, Á., Rao, A., & Nobre, A.C. (2009). Anticipating conflict facilitates controlled stimulus-response selection. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(8), 1461–1472. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21136.
Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(5), 1105. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.5.1105.
Dignath, D., & Eder, A. B. (2015). Stimulus conflict triggers behavioral avoidance. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(4), 822–836. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-015-0355-6.
Dreisbach, G., & Fischer, R. (2012). Conflicts as aversive signals. Brain and Cognition, 78(2), 94–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2011.12.003.
Dreisbach, G., & Fischer, R. (2015). Conflicts as aversive signals for control adaptation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(4), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415569569.
Duthoo, W., Abrahamse, E. L., Braem, S., Boehler, C. N., & Notebaert, W. (2014). The heterogeneous world of congruency sequence effects: an update. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1001. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01001.
Duthoo, W., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Conflict adaptation: it is not what you expect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(10), 1993–2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.676655.
Egner, T. (2011). Right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex mediates individual differences in conflict-driven cognitive control. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(12), 3903–3913. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00064.
Egner, T., Ely, S., & Grinband, J. (2010). Going, going, gone: characterizing the time-course of congruency sequence effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 154. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00154.
Fritz, J., & Dreisbach, G. (2013). Conflicts as aversive signals: conflict priming increases negative judgments for neutral stimuli. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(2), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-012-0147-1.
Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010). Sustained vs. transient cognitive control: Evidence of a behavioral dissociation. Cognition, 114(3), 338–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.007.
Geng, J. J. (2014). Attentional mechanisms of distractor suppression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(2), 147–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414525780.
Gonthier, C., Braver, T. S., & Bugg, J. M. (2016). Dissociating proactive and reactive control in the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition, 44(5), 778–788. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0591-1.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(4), 480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.480.
Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0048577201393198.
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348.
Grützmann, R., Riesel, A., Klawohn, J., Kathmann, N., & Endrass, T. (2014). Complementary modulation of N2 and CRN by conflict frequency. Psychophysiology, 51(8), 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12222.
Harding, S. D. (1982). Psychological well-being in Great Britain: an evaluation of the Bradburn affect balance scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 3(2), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(82)90031-9.
Hinault, T., Badier, J. M., Baillet, S., & Lemaire, P. (2017). The sources of sequential modulations of control processes in arithmetic strategies: A magnetoencephalography study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29(6), 1033–1043. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01102.
Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.007.
Inzlicht, M., Bartholow, B. D., & Hirsh, J. B. (2015). Emotional foundations of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(3), 126–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.01.004.
Karayanidis, F., Mansfield, E. L., Galloway, K. L., Smith, J. L., Provost, A., & Heathcote, A. (2009). Anticipatory reconfiguration elicited by fully and partially informative cues that validly predict a switch in task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 9(2), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.9.2.202.
Locke, H. S., & Braver, T. S. (2008). Motivational influences on cognitive control: Behavior, brain activation, and individual differences. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(1), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.1.99.
Meyer, T. J., Miller, M. L., Metzger, R. L., & Borkovec, T. D. (1990). Development and validation of the penn state worry questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 28(6), 487–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6.
Mordkoff, J. T. (2012). Observation: Three reasons to avoid having half of the trials be congruent in a four-alternative forced-choice experiment on sequential modulation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4), 750–757. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0257-3.
Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition, 106(2), 1071–1080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.011.
Paxton, J. L., Barch, D. M., Racine, C. A., & Braver, T. S. (2008). Cognitive control, goal maintenance, and prefrontal function in healthy aging. Cerebral Cortex, 18(5), 1010–1028. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhm135.
Rigoni, D., Braem, S., Pourtois, G., & Brass, M. (2016). Fake feedback on pain tolerance impacts proactive versus reactive control strategies. Consciousness and Cognition, 42, 366–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.04.015.
Rossi, V., & Pourtois, G. (2012). Transient state-dependent fluctuations in anxiety measured using STAI, POMS, PANAS or VAS: a comparative review. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 25(6), 603–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2011.582948.
Scherbaum, S., Fischer, R., Dshemuchadse, M., & Goschke, T. (2011). The dynamics of cognitive control: evidence for within-trial conflict adaptation from frequency-tagged EEG. Psychophysiology, 48(5), 591–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.685080.
Schmidt, J. R., & Weissman, D. H. (2014). Congruency sequence effects without feature integration or contingency learning confounds. PLoS One, 9(7), e102337. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102337.
Schouppe, N., Braem, S., De Houwer, J., Silvetti, M., Verguts, T., Ridderinkhof, K. R., & Notebaert, W. (2015). No pain, no gain: the affective valence of congruency conditions changes following a successful response. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(1), 251–261. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0318-3.
Schouppe, N., De Houwer, J., Ridderinkhof, R., K., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Conflict: Run! Reduced Stroop interference with avoidance responses. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(6), 1052–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.685080.
Shackman, A. J., Salomons, T. V., Slagter, H. A., Fox, A. S., Winter, J. J., & Davidson, R. J. (2011). The integration of negative affect, pain and cognitive control in the cingulate cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12(3), 154. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2994.
Shenhav, A., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M. (2016). Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control. Nature Neuroscience, 19(10), 1286. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4384.
Soutschek, A., Strobach, T., & Schubert, T. (2014). Motivational and cognitive determinants of control during conflict processing. Cognition and Emotion, 28(6), 1076–1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.870134.
Suzuki, K., & Shinoda, H. (2015). Transition from reactive control to proactive control across conflict adaptation: an sLORETA study. Brain and Cognition, 100, 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.09.001.
Torres-Quesada, M., Funes, M. J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2013). Dissociating proportion congruent and conflict adaptation effects in a Simon–Stroop procedure. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.11.015.
Van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2009). Reward counteracts conflict adaptation: evidence for a role of affect in executive control. Psychological Science, 20(12), 1473–1477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02470.x.
Van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2012). Reward valence modulates conflict-driven attentional adaptation: electrophysiological evidence. Biological Psychology, 90(3), 234–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.03.018.
Van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2015). Does conflict help or hurt cognitive control? Initial evidence for an inverted U-shape relationship between perceived task difficulty and conflict adaptation. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 974. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00974.
Vocat, R., Pourtois, G., & Vuilleumier, P. (2008). Unavoidable errors: A spatio-temporal analysis of time-course and neural sources of evoked potentials associated with error processing in a speeded task. Neuropsychologia, 46(10), 2545–2555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.04.006.
Warr, P. B., Barter, J., & Brownbridge, G. (1983). On the independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(3), 644–651. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.3.644.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063.
Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(5), 2022. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037454.
West, R., Choi, P., & Travers, S. (2010). The influence of negative affect on the neural correlates of cognitive control. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 76(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.03.002.
Yang, Q., & Pourtois, G. (2018). Conflict-driven adaptive control is enhanced by integral negative emotion on a short time scale. Cognition and Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2018.1434132.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a Grant (201606990022) from the China Scholarship Council (CN) and co-funding (BOF) Grant (BOFCHN2017000101) from Ghent University awarded to Qian Yang.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Ghent University and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, Q., Notebaert, W. & Pourtois, G. Reappraising cognitive control: normal reactive adjustments following conflict processing are abolished by proactive emotion regulation. Psychological Research 83, 1–12 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1099-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1099-z