Cognitive tasks, anatomical MRI, and functional MRI data evaluating the construct of self-regulation.

We describe the following shared data from N = 103 healthy adults who completed a broad set of cognitive tasks, surveys, and neuroimaging measurements to examine the construct of self-regulation. The neuroimaging acquisition involved task-based fMRI, resting state fMRI, and structural MRI. Each subject completed the following ten tasks in the scanner across two 90-minute scanning sessions: attention network test (ANT), cued task switching, Columbia card task, dot pattern expectancy (DPX), delay discounting, simple and motor selective stop signal, Stroop, a towers task, and a set of survey questions. The dataset is shared openly through the OpenNeuro project, and the dataset is formatted according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) standard.

The response time paradox in functional magnetic resonance imaging analyses.

Response times (RTs) are often the main signal of interest in cognitive psychology but are often ignored in functional MRI (fMRI) analyses. In fMRI analysis the intensity of the signal serves as a proxy for the intensity of local neuronal activity, but changes in either the intensity or the duration of neuronal activity can yield identical fMRI signals. Therefore, if RTs are ignored and pair with neuronal durations, fMRI results claiming intensity differences may be confounded by RTs. We show how ignoring RTs goes beyond this confound, where longer RTs are paired with larger activation estimates, to lesser-known issues where RTs become confounds in group-level analyses and, surprisingly, how the RT confound can induce other artificial group-level associations with variables that are not related to the condition contrast or RTs. We propose a new time-series model to address these issues and encourage increasing focus on what the widespread RT-based signal represents.

Cognitive tasks, anatomical MRI, and functional MRI data evaluating the construct of self-regulation.

We describe the following shared data from N=103 healthy adults who completed a broad set cognitive tasks, surveys, and neuroimaging measurements to examine the construct of self-regulation. The neuroimaging acquisition involved task-based fMRI, resting fMRI, and structural MRI. Each subject completed the following ten tasks in the scanner across two 90-minute scanning sessions: attention network test (ANT), cued task switching, Columbia card task, dot pattern expectancy (DPX), delay discounting, simple and motor selective stop signal, Stroop, a towers task, and a set of survey questions. Subjects also completed resting state scans. The dataset is shared openly through the OpenNeuro project, and the dataset is formatted according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) standard.

A dual-task approach to inform the taxonomy of inhibition-related processes.

Response inhibition is key to controlled behavior and is commonly investigated with the stop-signal paradigm. The authors investigated how response inhibition is situated within a taxonomy of control processes by combining multiple forms of control within dual tasks. Response inhibition, as measured by stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), was impaired when combined with shape matching, but not the flanker task, and when combined with cued task switching, but not predictable task switching, suggesting that response inhibition may be weakly or variably impaired when combined with selective attention and set shifting demands, respectively. Response inhibition was also consistently impaired when combined with the N-back or directed forgetting tasks, putative measures of working memory. Impairments of response inhibition by other control demands appeared to be primarily driven by task context, as SSRT slowing was similar for trials where control demands were either high (e.g., task switch) or low (e.g., task stay). These results demonstrate that response inhibition processes are often impaired in the context of other control demands, even on trials where direct engagement of those other control processes is not required. This suggests a taxonomy of control in which response inhibition overlaps with related control processes, especially working memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).