Advertisement

Brain Structure and Function

, Volume 223, Issue 4, pp 1797–1810 | Cite as

Neurophysiological variability masks differences in functional neuroanatomical networks and their effectiveness to modulate response inhibition between children and adults

  • Benjamin Bodmer
  • Moritz Mückschel
  • Veit Roessner
  • Christian Beste
Original Article

Abstract

Executive functions are well-known to undergo developmental changes from childhood to adulthood. Considerable efforts have been made to elucidate the affected system neurophysiological mechanisms. But while it is well-known that developmental changes affect intra-individual variability, this potential bias has largely been neglected when investigating the neurophysiology underlying developmental differences between children and adults. We hypothesize that due to differences in intra-individual variability of neural processes between children and adults, reliable group differences will only be evident after accounting for intra-individual variability in neurophysiological processes. We, therefore, investigate response-inhibition processes as an important instance of executive control in children (between 10 and 14 years) and adults (between 20 and 29 years) and decompose EEG data on the basis of the latency and temporal variability. This was combined with source localization. Children showed more impulsive behavior than adults. Importantly, a reliable match between the neurophysiological and behavioral data could only be found when accounting for intra-individual variability in the EEG data. These decomposed data showed that children and adults use similar neurophysiological mechanisms at the response selection level to accomplish inhibitory control, but seem to engage different neuroanatomical structures to do so according to source localization results: In adults, these processes were related to the medial frontal cortex. In children, the same processes were reflected in a shift of the scalp topography and related to the superior parietal cortex. These shifts in neural networks were associated with lower effectiveness in exerting inhibitory control. However, these differences in the functional neuroanatomical architecture can only be seen when intra-individual variability is taken into account.

Keywords

Response inhibition Children Adult Development EEG Cognitive control Source localization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was partly supported by a Grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) SFB 940 project B8. We thank all participants.

Compliance with ethical standards

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all adults before the experiment started. For children, written informed consent was obtained from the parents.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Medical faculty of the TU Dresden and conducted in accordance to the declaration of Helsinki.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Barber AD, Caffo BS, Pekar JJ, Mostofsky SH (2013a) Developmental changes in within- and between-network connectivity between late childhood and adulthood. Neuropsychologia 51:156–167.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.11.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber AD, Caffo BS, Pekar JJ, Mostofsky SH (2013b) Effects of working memory demand on neural mechanisms of motor response selection and control. J Cogn Neurosci 25:1235–1248.  https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00394 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Bari A, Robbins TW (2013) Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control. Prog Neurobiol 108:44–79.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.06.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Beste C, Dziobek I, Hielscher H et al (2009) Effects of stimulus-response compatibility on inhibitory processes in Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurosci 29:855–860.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06621.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Beste C, Willemssen R, Saft C, Falkenstein M (2010) Response inhibition subprocesses and dopaminergic pathways: basal ganglia disease effects. Neuropsychologia 48:366–373.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.09.023 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Beste C, Ness V, Falkenstein M, Saft C (2011) On the role of fronto-striatal neural synchronization processes for response inhibition–evidence from ERP phase-synchronization analyses in pre-manifest Huntington’s disease gene mutation carriers. Neuropsychologia 49:3484–3493.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.08.024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bielak AAM, Cherbuin N, Bunce D, Anstey KJ (2014) Intraindividual variability is a fundamental phenomenon of aging: evidence from an 8-year longitudinal study across young, middle, and older adulthood. Dev Psychol 50:143–151.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032650 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bluschke A, Broschwitz F, Kohl S et al (2016a) The neuronal mechanisms underlying improvement of impulsivity in ADHD by theta/beta neurofeedback. Sci Rep 6:31178.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep31178 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Bluschke A, Roessner V, Beste C (2016b) Specific cognitive-neurophysiological processes predict impulsivity in the childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder combined subtype. Psychol Med 46:1277–1287.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002822 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bodmer B, Beste C (2017) On the dependence of response inhibition processes on sensory modality. Hum Brain Mapp 38:1941–1951.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23495 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonnefond A, Doignon-Camus N, Touzalin-Chretien P, Dufour A (2010) Vigilance and intrinsic maintenance of alert state: an ERP study. Behav Brain Res 211:185–190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2010.03.030 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Brandeis D, van Leeuwen TH, Rubia K et al (1998) Neuroelectric mapping reveals precursor of stop failures in children with attention deficits. Behav Brain Res 94:111–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cauller LJ, Kulics AT (1991) The neural basis of the behaviorally relevant N1 component of the somatosensory-evoked potential in SI cortex of awake monkeys: evidence that backward cortical projections signal conscious touch sensation. Exp Brain Res 84:607–619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chmielewski WX, Beste C (2015) Action control processes in autism spectrum disorder–insights from a neurobiological and neuroanatomical perspective. Prog Neurobiol 124:49–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2014.11.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Chmielewski WX, Mückschel M, Dippel G, Beste C (2015a) Concurrent information affects response inhibition processes via the modulation of theta oscillations in cognitive control networks. Brain Struct Funct.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-015-1137-1 Google Scholar
  16. Chmielewski WX, Roessner V, Beste C (2015b) Predictability and context determine differences in conflict monitoring between adolescence and adulthood. Behav Brain Res 292:10–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2015.05.054 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Diamond A (2013) Executive functions. Annu Rev Psychol 64:135–168.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Dippel G, Beste C (2015) A causal role of the right inferior frontal cortex in implementing strategies for multi-component behaviour. Nat Commun 6:6587.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7587 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dippel G, Chmielewski W, Mückschel M, Beste C (2015) Response mode-dependent differences in neurofunctional networks during response inhibition: an EEG-beamforming study. Brain Struct Funct.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-015-1148-y Google Scholar
  20. Fair DA, Cohen AL, Power JD et al (2009) Functional brain networks develop from a “local to distributed” organization. PLoS Comput Biol 5:e1000381.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000381 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan L-Y, Gau SS-F, Chou T-L (2014) Neural correlates of inhibitory control and visual processing in youths with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a counting Stroop functional MRI study. Psychol Med 44:2661–2671.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291714000038 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Fitzgerald KD, Zbrozek CD, Welsh RC et al (2008) Pilot study of response inhibition and error processing in the posterior medial prefrontal cortex in healthy youth. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 49:986–994.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01906.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fokin VA, Shelepin YE, Kharauzov AK et al (2008) Localization of human cortical areas activated on perception of ordered and chaotic images. Neurosci Behav Physiol 38:677–685.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-008-9033-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fuchs M, Kastner J, Wagner M et al (2002) A standardized boundary element method volume conductor model. Clin Neurophysiol Off J Int Fed Clin Neurophysiol 113:702–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Garrett DD, Macdonald SWS, Craik FIM (2012) Intraindividual reaction time variability is malleable: feedback- and education-related reductions in variability with age. Front Hum Neurosci 6:101.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00101 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Garrett DD, Samanez-Larkin GR, MacDonald SWS et al (2013) Moment-to-moment brain signal variability: a next frontier in human brain mapping? Neurosci Biobehav Rev 37:610–624.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.02.015 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Giorgio A, Santelli L, Tomassini V et al (2010) Age-related changes in grey and white matter structure throughout adulthood. NeuroImage 51:943–951.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.004 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Gogtay N, Giedd JN, Lusk L et al (2004) Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:8174–8179.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402680101 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Hämmerer D, Li S-C, Müller V, Lindenberger U (2010) An electrophysiological study of response conflict processing across the lifespan: assessing the roles of conflict monitoring, cue utilization, response anticipation, and response suppression. Neuropsychologia 48:3305–3316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.07.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hämmerer D, Müller V, Li S-C (2014) Performance monitoring across the lifespan: Still maturing post-conflict regulation in children and declining task-set monitoring in older adults. Neurosci Biobehav Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.06.008 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Herrmann CS, Knight RT (2001) Mechanisms of human attention: event-related potentials and oscillations. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 25:465–476CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Huster RJ, Enriquez-Geppert S, Lavallee CF et al (2013) Electroencephalography of response inhibition tasks: functional networks and cognitive contributions. Int J Psychophysiol Off J Int Organ Psychophysiol 87:217–233.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.08.001 Google Scholar
  33. Johnstone SJ, Dimoska A, Smith JL et al (2007) The development of stop-signal and Go/Nogo response inhibition in children aged 7–12 years: performance and event-related potential indices. Int J Psychophysiol Off J Int Organ Psychophysiol 63:25–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.07.001 Google Scholar
  34. Jonkman LM (2006) The development of preparation, conflict monitoring and inhibition from early childhood to young adulthood: a Go/Nogo ERP study. Brain Res 1097:181–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.04.064 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Jonkman LM, Sniedt FLF, Kemner C (2007) Source localization of the Nogo-N2: a developmental study. Clin Neurophysiol Off J Int Fed Clin Neurophysiol 118:1069–1077.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2007.01.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lehto JE, Juujärvi P, Kooistra L, Pulkkinen L (2003) Dimensions of executive functioning: Evidence from children. Br J Dev Psychol 21:59–80.  https://doi.org/10.1348/026151003321164627 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewis MD, Lamm C, Segalowitz SJ et al (2006) Neurophysiological correlates of emotion regulation in children and adolescents. J Cogn Neurosci 18:430–443.  https://doi.org/10.1162/089892906775990633 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu Z-X, Woltering S, Lewis MD (2014) Developmental change in EEG theta activity in the medial prefrontal cortex during response control. NeuroImage 85 Pt 2:873–887.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.054 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marco-Pallarés J, Grau C, Ruffini G (2005) Combined ICA-LORETA analysis of mismatch negativity. NeuroImage 25:471–477.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.028 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Mella N, Fagot D, Lecerf T, de Ribaupierre A (2015) Working memory and intraindividual variability in processing speed: a lifespan developmental and individual-differences study. Mem Cognit 43:340–356.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0491-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mella N, Fagot D, de Ribaupierre A (2016) Dispersion in cognitive functioning: Age differences over the lifespan. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 38:111–126.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2015.1089979 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Migliorini R, Moore EM, Glass L et al (2015) Anterior cingulate cortex surface area relates to behavioral inhibition in adolescents with and without heavy prenatal alcohol exposure. Behav Brain Res 292:26–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2015.05.037 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Mückschel M, Stock A-K, Beste C (2014) Psychophysiological mechanisms of interindividual differences in goal activation modes during action cascading. Cereb Cortex 1991 24:2120–2129.  https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht066 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Mückschel M, Chmielewski W, Ziemssen T, Beste C (2017) The norepinephrine system shows information-content specific properties during cognitive control - Evidence from EEG and pupillary responses. NeuroImage 149:44–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.01.036 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Nunez PL, Pilgreen KL (1991) The spline-Laplacian in clinical neurophysiology: a method to improve EEG spatial resolution. J Clin Neurophysiol Off Publ Am Electroencephalogr Soc 8:397–413Google Scholar
  46. Ocklenburg S, Güntürkün O, Beste C (2011) Lateralized neural mechanisms underlying the modulation of response inhibition processes. NeuroImage 55:1771–1778.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.035 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Ouyang G, Herzmann G, Zhou C, Sommer W (2011) Residue iteration decomposition (RIDE): A new method to separate ERP components on the basis of latency variability in single trials. Psychophysiology 48:1631–1647.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01269.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Ouyang G, Schacht A, Zhou C, Sommer W (2013) Overcoming limitations of the ERP method with residue iteration decomposition (RIDE): a demonstration in go/no-go experiments. Psychophysiology 50:253–265.  https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Ouyang G, Sommer W, Zhou C (2015a) A toolbox for residue iteration decomposition (RIDE)--A method for the decomposition, reconstruction, and single trial analysis of event related potentials. J Neurosci Methods 250:7–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.10.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Ouyang G, Sommer W, Zhou C (2015b) Updating and validating a new framework for restoring and analyzing latency-variable ERP components from single trials with residue iteration decomposition (RIDE). Psychophysiology 52:839–856.  https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12411 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Ouyang G, Hildebrandt A, Sommer W, Zhou C (2017) Exploiting the intra-subject latency variability from single-trial event-related potentials in the P3 time range: a review and comparative evaluation of methods. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 75:1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.023 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Pascual-Marqui RD (2002) Standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA): technical details. Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol 24(Suppl D):5–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Rubia K, Smith AB, Woolley J et al (2006) Progressive increase of frontostriatal brain activation from childhood to adulthood during event-related tasks of cognitive control. Hum Brain Mapp 27:973–993.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20237 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Rubia K, Smith AB, Taylor E, Brammer M (2007) Linear age-correlated functional development of right inferior fronto-striato-cerebellar networks during response inhibition and anterior cingulate during error-related processes. Hum Brain Mapp 28:1163–1177.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20347 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Sekihara K, Sahani M, Nagarajan SS (2005) Localization bias and spatial resolution of adaptive and non-adaptive spatial filters for MEG source reconstruction. NeuroImage 25:1056–1067.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.051 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith JL, Johnstone SJ, Barry RJ (2004) Inhibitory processing during the Go/NoGo task: an ERP analysis of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Clin Neurophysiol Off J Int Fed Clin Neurophysiol 115:1320–1331.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2003.12.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sowell ER, Peterson BS, Thompson PM et al (2003) Mapping cortical change across the human life span. Nat Neurosci 6:309–315.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Staub B, Doignon-Camus N, Bacon É, Bonnefond A (2014) The effects of aging on sustained attention ability: an ERP study. Psychol Aging 29:684–695.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037067 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Stock A-K, Popescu F, Neuhaus AH, Beste C (2015) Single-subject prediction of response inhibition behavior by event-related potentials. J Neurophysiol.  https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00969.2015 00969.2015.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. Störmer V, Eppinger B, Li S-C (2014) Reward speeds up and increases consistency of visual selective attention: a lifespan comparison. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 14:659–671.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0273-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Takeichi H, Koyama S, Terao A et al (2010) Comprehension of degraded speech sounds with m-sequence modulation: an fMRI study. NeuroImage 49:2697–2706.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.063 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Tamnes CK, Fjell AM, Westlye LT et al (2012) Becoming consistent: developmental reductions in intraindividual variability in reaction time are related to white matter integrity. J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci 32:972–982.  https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4779-11.2012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taylor S, McLean B, Falkmer T et al (2016) Does somatosensation change with age in children and adolescents? A systematic review. Child Care Health Dev.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12375 Google Scholar
  65. Verleger R, Metzner MF, Ouyang G et al (2014) Testing the stimulus-to-response bridging function of the oddball-P3 by delayed response signals and residue iteration decomposition (RIDE). NeuroImage 100:271–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.036 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Vidal J, Mills T, Pang EW, Taylor MJ (2012) Response inhibition in adults and teenagers: spatiotemporal differences in the prefrontal cortex. Brain Cogn 79:49–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2011.12.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Wessel JR, Aron AR (2015) It’s not too late: the onset of the frontocentral P3 indexes successful response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Psychophysiology 52:472–480.  https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12374 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Wolff N, Mückschel M, Beste C (2017) Neural mechanisms and functional neuroanatomical networks during memory and cue-based task switching as revealed by residue iteration decomposition (RIDE) based source localization. Brain Struct Funct.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-017-1437-8 Google Scholar
  69. Woltering S, Liu Z, Rokeach A, Tannock R (2013) Neurophysiological differences in inhibitory control between adults with ADHD and their peers. Neuropsychologia 51:1888–1895.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.06.023 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin Bodmer
    • 1
  • Moritz Mückschel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Veit Roessner
    • 1
  • Christian Beste
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Cognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of MedicineTU DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, MS Centre Dresden, Centre of Clinical NeuroscienceTU DresdenDresdenGermany
  3. 3.Experimental NeurobiologyNational Institute of Mental HealthKlecanyCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations