Affective Modulation of Cognitive Control: A Biobehavioral Perspective

Abstract

One important function of cognitive control is to continuously adapt the cognitive system to changes in situational demands. This chapter discusses how affective and motivational states drive this control function as evidenced by behavior and neural trial-to-trial adaptations in experimental conflict tasks (such as the Stroop task). A theoretical framework is then described that addresses how affective signals might be instrumental in behavioral adjustments to cognitively demanding situations. The basic assumption is that demanding situations trigger a negative, aversive state. The resulting aversive affect may help to subsequently mobilize cognitive effort. Furthermore, affect introduced during demanding tasks may modulate demand-driven effort mobilization in an affect-congruent way. At the neural level, affect might regulate cognitive control via subcortical areas modulating the prefrontal cortex. The need for allocating additional cognitive control may be signaled by medial parts of the prefrontal cortex, in particular the anterior cingulate cortex. After reviewing evidence for the hedonic marking of conflict, recent findings from studies using affect-induction paradigms are discussed. Effects of short-term and sustained affect as well as stress and depression are described. Neuroimaging studies that hint at the role of fronto-striatal interactions in the affective regulation of cognitive control are also discussed. The proposed integrated account emphasizes the functional role of both positive and negative emotions in the behavioral and neural adaptation of cognitive control. This work provides new insights in the biobehavioral basis of a wide range of other phenomena where affect plays a critical role in adaptive behavior and self-regulation.

Conclusions

As many studies reviewed in this chapter have shown, positive affect helps to reduce control adaptations to cognitive demands , likely by reducing the aversive state induced by these demands. Negative affect , on the other hand intensifies such adaptation—at least as long as success is possible and worthwhile. This affective modulation of control was found to be driven by neural processing in subcortical “hedonic hotspots” which attenuated demand-related processing in the ACC and behavioral adaptation.

Viewed from a broader perspective, the findings I have reviewed here demonstrate the importance of the temporal dynamics that underlie self-regulation processes; they show that cognitive control can quickly increase in response to stimuli that conflict with current goals. The ability to quickly allocate more cognitive control in challenging situations might prove critical in many situations requiring self-regulation . Particularly, quick increases in self-control might be adaptive when the stimulus that conflict with one’s primary goal is only available for a short period of time. Those situations occur rather often in daily life, for example, when one passes a McDonald’s while driving on a highway or when a waitress offers a delicious but unhealthy snack during a cocktail party. Transient increases in cognitive control in such situations might be sufficient to behave according with long-term goals (e.g., staying healthy). In other situations, quick increases in self-control might be sufficient to drive behavioral strategies such as moving unhealthy food out of sight or reach, making the need for intensive sustained self-control superfluous. Such flexibility in the short-term implementation and adjustment of goals has been seen as characteristic of good self-management and self-regulation skills (Baumeister et al. 1994).

The evidence for a role of affect in and on the dynamic adjustments in cognitive control, as reviewed in this chapter, emphasize the important role that affect plays in the mobilization of effort and self-control processes. Whereas positive affect might help to prevent a too strong impact of cognitive demands on self-control (Garland et al. 2010), a little bit of negative affect on the other hand might help us to stay focused when dealing with a difficult situation. In other words, positive and negative affect might help to regulate the balance between task perseveration and flexibility (Dreisbach and Goschke 2004; cf. Carver and Scheier 1990; Carver 2003; Kuhl and Kazen 1999). In this respect, both positive and negative affective states can have adaptive value for self-control when experienced in the right context (Gruber et al. 2011).

By showing how neural interactions drive adjustments in cognitive control, we have started to develop a more mechanistic understanding of self-control processes and the role that affect plays in it modulation. In particular, we have suggested that mutual interactions between hedonic hotspots in the BG on the one hand, and dorsal and rostral parts of the ACC on the other hand, drive the hedonic regulation of adjustments in cognitive control (van Steenbergen et al. in press). Examining these mechanisms further may provide new insights in the biobehavioral basis of a wide range of other phenomena where affect plays a critical role in adaptive behavior and self-regulation (cf. Proulx et al. 2012).

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Guido Band and Bernhard Hommel who were involved in many of the studies described in this chapter. This work was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). In addition, I would like to thank Sander Koole, Mattie Tops, and Senne Braem for providing helpful feedback on an earlier draft of this chapter.