Dissociable Contributions of Goal-Relevant Evidence and Goal-Irrelevant Familiarity to Individual and Developmental Differences in Conflict Recognition.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
Recent studies using the diffusion decision model find that performance across many cognitive control tasks can be largely attributed to a task-general efficiency of evidence accumulation (EEA) factor that reflects individuals' ability to selectively gather evidence relevant to task goals. However, estimates of EEA from an n-back "conflict recognition" paradigm in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM (ABCD) Study, a large, diverse sample of youth, appear to contradict these findings. EEA estimates from "lure" trials-which present stimuli that are familiar (i.e., presented previously) but do not meet formal criteria for being a target-show inconsistent relations with EEA estimates from other trials and display atypical v-shaped bivariate distributions, suggesting many individuals are responding based largely on stimulus familiarity rather than goal-relevant stimulus features. We present a new formal model of evidence integration in conflict recognition tasks that distinguishes individuals' EEA for goal-relevant evidence from their use of goal-irrelevant familiarity. We then investigate developmental, cognitive, and clinical correlates of these novel parameters. Parameters for EEA and goal-irrelevant familiarity-based processing showed strong correlations across levels of n-back load, suggesting they are task-general dimensions that influence individuals' performance regardless of working memory demands. Only EEA showed large, robust developmental differences in the ABCD sample and an independent age-diverse sample. EEA also exhibited higher test-retest reliability and uniquely meaningful associations with clinically relevant dimensions. These findings establish a principled modeling framework for characterizing conflict recognition mechanisms and have several broader implications for research on individual and developmental differences in cognitive control.
