Young and elderly adults performed a choice-RT task while scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging. A foreperiod separated a warning and a response signal. In the variable condition, the foreperiod varied randomly between 1 and 3s. In the fixed conditions, it was kept constant at either 1 or 3s. Elderly subjects responded slower than controls in both task conditions. An interaction was observed between age and foreperiod in the variable condition only: in the young group, RT decreased with longer foreperiods, whereas the elderly participants showed the opposite tendency. This was accompanied by difference in brain activation. Right lateral prefrontal regions were more activated in the young than in the elderly group in the variable vs. fixed foreperiod contrast. These findings unveil the neural substrate of age-related preparation deficits, and confirm that the involvement of right lateral prefrontal cortex is essential for strategic preparation under uncertain timing conditions.

The ability to flexibly switch between fast and accurate decisions is crucial in everyday life. Recent neuroimaging evidence suggested that left lateral prefrontal cortex plays a role in switching from a quick response strategy to an accurate one. However, the causal role of the left prefrontal cortex in this particular, non-verbal, strategy switch has never been demonstrated. To fill this gap, we administered a perceptual decision-making task to neuro-oncological prefrontal patients, in which the requirement to be quick or accurate changed randomly on a trial-by-trial basis. To directly assess hemispheric asymmetries in speed-accuracy regulation, patients were tested a few days before and a few days after surgical excision of a brain tumor involving either the left (N=13) or the right (N=12) lateral frontal brain region. A group of age- and education-matched healthy controls was also recruited. To gain more insight on the component processes implied in the task, performance data (accuracy and speed) were not only analyzed separately but also submitted to a diffusion model analysis. The main findings indicated that the left prefrontal patients were impaired in appropriately adopting stricter response criteria in speed-to-accuracy switching trials with respect to healthy controls and right prefrontal patients, who were not impaired in this condition. This study demonstrates that the prefrontal cortex in the left hemisphere is necessary for flexible behavioral regulations, in particular when setting stricter response criteria is required in order to successfully switch from a speedy strategy to an accurate one.

Despite network studies of the human brain have brought consistent evidence of brain regions with diverse functional roles, the neuropsychological approach has mainly focused on the functional specialization of individual brain regions. Relatively few neuropsychological studies try to understand whether the severity of cognitive impairment across multiple cognitive abilities can be related to focal brain injuries. Here we approached this issue by applying a latent variable modeling of the severity of cognitive impairment in brain tumor patients, followed by multivariate lesion-symptom methods identifying brain regions critically involved in multiple cognitive abilities. We observed that lesions in confined left lateral prefrontal areas including the inferior frontal junction produced the most severe cognitive deficits, above and beyond tumor histology. Our findings support the recently suggested integrated albeit modular view of brain functional organization, according to which specific brain regions are highly involved across different sub-networks and subserve a vast range of cognitive abilities. Defining such brain regions is relevant not only theoretically but also clinically, since it may facilitate tailored tumor resections and improve cognitive surgical outcomes.

The diverging evidence for functional localization of response inhibition within the prefrontal cortex might be justified by the still unclear involvement of other intrinsically related cognitive processes like response selection and sustained attention. In this study, the main aim was to understand whether inhibitory impairments, previously found in patients with both left and right frontal lesions, could be better accounted for by assessing these potentially related cognitive processes. We tested 37 brain tumor patients with left prefrontal, right prefrontal and non-prefrontal lesions and a healthy control group on Go/No-Go and Foreperiod tasks. In both types of tasks inhibitory impairments are likely to cause false alarms, although additionally the former task requires response selection and the latter target detection abilities. Irrespective of the task context, patients with right prefrontal damage showed frequent Go and target omissions, probably due to sustained attention lapses. Left prefrontal patients, on the other hand, showed both Go and target omissions and high false alarm rates to No-Go and warning stimuli, suggesting a decisional rather than an inhibitory impairment. An exploratory whole-brain voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping analysis confirmed the association of left ventrolateral and dorsolateral prefrontal lesions with target discrimination failure, and right ventrolateral and medial prefrontal lesions with target detection failure. Results from this study show how left and right prefrontal areas, which previous research has linked to response inhibition, underlie broader cognitive control processes, particularly involved in response selection and target detection. Based on these findings, we suggest that successful inhibitory control relies on more than one functionally distinct process which, if assessed appropriately, might help us to better understand inhibitory impairments across different pathologies.

Though the assessment of cognitive functions is proven to be a reliable prognostic indicator in patients with brain tumors, some of these functions, such as cognitive control, are still rarely investigated. The objective of this study was to examine proactive and reactive control functions in patients with focal brain tumors and to identify lesioned brain areas more at "risk" for developing impairment of these functions. To this end, a group of twenty-two patients, candidate to surgery, were tested with an AX-CPT task and a Stroop task, along with a clinical neuropsychological assessment, and their performance was compared to that of a well-matched healthy control group. Although overall accuracy and response times were similar for patients and control groups, the patient group failed more on the BX trials of the AX-CPT task and on the incongruent trials of the Stroop task, specifically. Behavioral results were associated with the damaged brain areas, mostly distributed in right frontal regions, by means of a lesion-symptom mapping multivariate approach. This analysis showed that a white matter cluster in the right prefrontal area was associated with lower d'-context values on the AX-CPT, which reflected the fact that these patients rely more on later information (reactive processes) to respond to unexpected and conflicting stimuli, than on earlier contextual cues (proactive processes). Taken together, these results suggest that patients with brain tumors present an imbalance between proactive and reactive control strategies in high interfering conditions, in association with right prefrontal white matter lesions.

Inductive reasoning is an everyday process that allows us to make sense of the world by creating rules from a series of instances. Consistent with accounts of process-based fractionations of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) along the left-right axis, inductive reasoning has been reliably localized to left PFC. However, these results may be confounded by the task domain, which is typically verbal. Indeed, some studies show that right PFC activation is seen with spatial tasks. This study used fMRI to examine the effects of process and domain on the brain regions recruited during a novel pattern discovery task. Twenty healthy young adult participants were asked to discover the rule underlying the presentation of a series of letters in varied spatial locations. The rules were either verbal (pertaining to a single semantic category) or spatial (geometric figures). Bilateral ventrolateral PFC activations were seen for the spatial domain, while the verbal domain showed only left ventrolateral PFC. A conjunction analysis revealed that the two domains recruited a common region of left ventrolateral PFC. The data support a central role of left PFC in inductive reasoning. Importantly, they also suggest that both process and domain shape the localization of reasoning in the brain.

While it is well-established that monitoring the environment for the occurrence of relevant events represents a key executive function, it is still unclear whether such a function is mediated by domain-general or domain-specific mechanisms. We investigated this issue by combining event-related potentials (ERPs) with a behavioral paradigm in which monitoring processes (non-monitoring vs. monitoring) and cognitive domains (spatial vs. verbal) were orthogonally manipulated in the same group of participants. They had to categorize 3-dimensional visually presented words on the basis of either spatial or verbal rules. In monitoring blocks, they additionally had to check whether the word displayed a specific spatial configuration or whether it contained a certain consonant. The behavioral results showed slower responses for both spatial and verbal monitoring trials compared to non-monitoring trials. The ERP results revealed that monitoring did not interact with domain, thus suggesting the involvement of common underlying mechanisms. Specifically, monitoring acted on low-level perceptual processes (as expressed by an enhanced visual N1 wave and a sustained posterior negativity for monitoring trials) and on higher-level cognitive processes (involving larger positive modulations by monitoring trials over frontal and parietal scalp regions). The source reconstruction analysis of the ERP data confirmed that monitoring was associated with increased activity in visual areas and in right prefrontal and parietal regions (i.e., superior and inferior frontal gyri and posterior parietal cortex), which previous studies have linked to spatial and temporal monitoring. Our findings extend this research by supporting the domain-general nature of monitoring in the spatial and verbal domains.

Error processing is a critical step towards an efficient adaptation of our behavior to achieve a goal. Little research has been devoted to investigate the contribution of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in supporting error processing. In this study, the causal relationship of the DLPFC in error commission was examined by means of a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol (rTMS). Specifically, the effects of an inhibitory protocol were assessed by examining the electroencephalographic signal recorded during the execution of a Go/No-Go task. To this aim, a group of 15 healthy young participants performed a three-session study. At each session, either the right DLPFC, the left DLPFC, or the Vertex (control site) were stimulated, for 20 min at 1 Hz. Immediately after the stimulation, participants performed the task. Although no behavioral effects of rTMS emerged, the analysis of event-related electric potentials (ERPs) revealed that the amplitude of a positive potential evoked by error commission, the error positivity (Pe), was reduced after the stimulation of the left DLPFC. On the contrary, the earlier error-related negativity component (ERN) was not affected. These results revealed that the left DLPFC intervenes at later stages of error-related processes. We could speculate that its role is specifically linked to error awareness.