Cognitive Control Challenges:
Difficulties in Stopping the
Wrong Response
Heather M. Shapiro
Neuroscience PhD Candidate, UC Davis MIND Institute
Advisor: Dr. Tony Simon, PhD
Chromosome 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome Family Meeting
April 15, 2012, MIND Institute, Sacramento, CA
Cognitive Control
•
•
System for guiding behavior based on one’s goals, plans, and context
The ability to suppress irrelevant thoughts and actions while
maintaining or strengthening others (Posner & Petersen 1990)
Cognitive control
Cognitive Control in 22q
Previous studies indicate that children
with 22q might be impaired on tasks that
measure cognitive control...
•
•
What might be the nature and extent of these impairments?
•
testing response inhibition
Might these impairments change throughout development?
•
7-14 year-old children with 22q and
typically developing (TD) children
Methods
•
Paradigm: Go/No-Go response inhibition task
•
Participants:
•
27 children with 22q (7-14 years old, mean = 11.6)
•
•
•
12 younger (7-10 years old; mean = 9.0)
15 older (11-14 years old; mean = 13.7)
22 typically developing (TD) children (7-14 years old, mean = 10.8)
•
•
12 younger (7-10 years old; mean = 8.9)
10 older (11-14 years old; mean = 13.0)
Go/No-Go
“Whack the mole as FAST as you can before it gets away!”
Go/No-Go
“The mole tries to be tricky and put on different disguises.”
“You still need to whack the mole as quickly as you can!”
Go/No-Go
“Sometimes a vegetable will pop up in your garden.”
“Don’t squash the vegetable!”
Let’s Practice...
Methods
Go/No-Go Response Inhibition Task:
•
•
“Go” trials (75%): press a button as quickly as possible to “whack” the mole
“No-Go” trials (25%): do NOT press button to not “squash” the vegetable
•
Preceded by 1, 3, or 5 “Go” trials
5
3
1
Results: Overall group differences
90
TD
22q
80
Accuracy (%)
Accuracy (%)
Accuracy
(%)
90
90
TD
22q
85
70
TD
22q
85
60
80
50
75
40
80
75
70
65
30
70
20
60
65
10
60
1
35
5
3
5
0
1
Overall
3
Younger
5
Older
5
3
1
3
1
1
# preceding Go trials
Unlike TD children, some children with 22q do not do better
when more “Go” trials indicate an upcoming “NoGo” trial
Results: Overall group differences
90
480
Accuracy (%)
Response time (ms)
RT (ms)
470
TD
22q
85
TD
22q
460
450
440
430
80
75
70
65
420
410
60
400
1
35
5
3
5
390
1
2
3
4
5
Go trials: in order following No-Go
Timing similar between groups!
5
3
1
3
1
1
# preceding Go trials
Monitoring of upcoming inhibitory response is the same
between groups, despite ultimate performance error in 22q
Results: Age and Response Inhibition
60
50
Accuracy(%)
(%)
Accuracy
TDTD
TD
22q
90
22q
22q
22q
0
90
80
0
80
70
0
70
60
0
60
50
0
50
40
0
40
30
0
30
20
0
20
10
0
10
0
0
0 Overall
Overall
Overall Younger
Overall
Younger
TD−younger
TD
TD−older
22q
22q−younger
22q−older
100
90
95
80
90
540
520
70
85
60
80
50
75
40
70
30
65
20
60
10
55
0
Overall
50
1
3
Younger
5
3
5
Younger
Younger
Older
Older
Older
Older
5
3
1
3
1
1
5
RT (ms)
Response
time (ms)
40
TD−younger
TD−older
22q−younger
22q−older
TD
Accuracy
(%)
Accuracy (%)
Accur
70
500
Older
360
TD−younger
TD−older
22q−younger
22q−older
480
460
440
420
400
380
340
1
2
3
4
5
Go trials: in order following No-Go
Timing similar between groups!
# preceding Go trials
While TD children improve with age, some children
with 22q do not appear to get better with age
Results: Age-Related Variance
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
90
Accuracy (%)
*--./0-12345
100
80
70
60
50
40
2
!
"
#
$%
TD−younger
TD−older
22q−younger
22q−older
$$ $& $' $( $)
*+,
Increased performance variance in older children with 22q suggests
a subgroup with atypical development of response inhibition
Conclusions
•
Neurocognitive experiments such as the “whack-a-mole”
go/no-go might help us to better understand the nature of
cognitive control challenges in children with 22q.
•
Individual performance patterns might identify those with
more, and less, typical cognitive control abilities.
•
As part of a larger study, this investigation might help
identify risk factors leading to early diagnosis and targeted
therapeutic intervention.
Thank You!
Tony Simon
Elliott Beaton
Naomi Hunsaker
Michelle Deng
Ling Wong
Andrea Quintero
Bella McLennan
Margie Cabaral
Josh Cruz
Participants and families