A computational model of anterior cingulate function in speeded response tasks: Effects of frequency, sequence, and conflict

Jones, Cho, Nystrom, Cohen, Braver · Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience · 2002 · neuroscience · 10.3758/cabn.2.4.300 · record Jones2002-a-computational-model-of-anterior-cingulate
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (pdftext); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. Claim type could arguably be 'method' (the deliverable is a computational model), but the model is deployed to explain WHY ACC activity tracks low-frequency stimuli via sequential priming and conflict, so the shape is mechanistic. The paper is a hybrid: simulation is the new work, but it re-analyses previously published fMRI (Braver et al., 2001) and pilot behavioural data, which the single 'method' facet cannot express. The paper also frames one result as a novel prediction ('that it is the local sequential history, rather than global frequency, that should drive modulations in ACC activity'), i.e. a prediction facet is present as a secondary claim. 2026-08-19 and 2026-08-25 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node.

2 quotes on this page break a word across a line. The PDF this text was extracted from hyphenated those words at the end of a printed line — adversar- ial, repre- sentations — and the extractor kept the hyphen and the space. The quotes keep them because a quote is reproduced exactly or it proves nothing: the break is the typesetter’s, not the author’s. A search of this page will not find the affected words.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Other fields define these differently the same word, defined another way in another discipline
confidence interval 2 fields · simulation 2 fields

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 4 concept tags on this paper, all 4 are grounded in a quoted sentence. All carry the tagger's gloss of what the term means in this paper, which is not something the article can license.

response conflict anterior cingulate cortex cognitive control conflict model Repeated high-frequency stimuli build residual activation (an expectancy) in one stimulus-response pathway, so a low-frequency stimulus must overcome that preactivation, and the resulting competition is what registers as conflict in ACC. Conflict at the decision layer produces ACC-indexed signal that lowers strategic priming, which raises control (slower, more accurate responding) on subsequent trials. Because the incorrect nontarget decision unit in one-response tasks is not connected to a response execution unit, transient wrong-channel activation never becomes an overt error, so the task difference arises downstream of conflict detection rather than at it. repetition priming and alternation priming conflict stimulus frequency sequential history reaction time and error rate ACC activity simulated conflict lesioned model ANOVA correlation partial correlation confidence interval standard score (z score) z scores t-test p-value mean mean RT and percentage of error simulation

Legend

relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
concept	`concepts`	an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
control	`controls`	an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.3758/cabn.2.4.300. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

claim_relations 3 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 1 · concepts 4 · content_tags 31 · controls 1 · limitations 3 · mechanisms 3 · method 1 · phenomenon 1 · senses 3

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 1 relation here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
claim_type	mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	response conflict monitoring in anterior cingulate cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	simulation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: simulation	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Repeated high-frequency stimuli build residual activation (an expectancy) in one stimulus-response pathway, so a low-frequency stimulus must overcome that preactivation, and the resulting competition is what registers as conflict in ACC.	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Conflict at the decision layer produces ACC-indexed signal that lowers strategic priming, which raises control (slower, more accurate responding) on subsequent trials.	`mechanisms[1]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Because the incorrect nontarget decision unit in one-response tasks is not connected to a response execution unit, transient wrong-channel activation never becomes an overt error, so the task difference arises downstream of conflict detection rather than at it.	`mechanisms[2]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The trial-by-trial fit of the model to individual subjects' behaviour is low, which the authors attribute partly to unsimulated human noise processes. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the trial-by-trial fit to individual behaviour: ALTHOUGH THESE NUMBERS INDICATE A SOMEWHAT LOW FIT, NOISE PROCESSES IN HUMANS (WHICH ARE POORLY UNDERSTOOD) MAY MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO TRIAL-BY-TRIAL BEHAVIORAL PERFORMANCE	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The imaging reanalysis testing the sequence prediction was hampered by hemodynamic overlap in rapid event-related fMRI. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the imaging test of the sequence prediction: THIS ANALYSIS WAS COMPLICATED BY OUR USE OF RAPID EVENT-RELATED fMRI AND THE SLOW EVOLUTION OF THE HEMODYNAMIC RESPONSE	`limitations[1]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The model covers only a specific type of control, not cognitive control in general. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the model's coverage, bounded by the authors: THE PRESENT STUDY WAS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE A COMPLETE ACCOUNT OF THE MYRIAD PROCESSES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO COGNITIVE CONTROL	`limitations[2]`		the tagger's words
controls	the mapping of stimuli onto the target and nontarget categories was counterbalanced across subjects Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that a category effect is a stimulus effect - that the target set is simply easier · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held	`controls[0]`	0.95	the tagger's words
concepts	response conflict Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response conflict	`concepts[0]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	anterior cingulate cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: anterior cingulate cortex	`concepts[1]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	cognitive control Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cognitive control	`concepts[2]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	conflict model Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: conflict model	`concepts[3]`	0.95	the paper's words
senses	THE MECHANISM IS A CHAIN OF THREE VERBS AND EACH ONE IS DOING WORK: the ACC `detects the presence of response conflict and conveys this information to other brain regions, enabling subsequent adjustments in cognitive control`. Detect, convey, adjust. A claim that a region is `active during` something cannot be wrong in an interesting way; this one can - it predicts that the signal precedes the adjustment, that removing it removes the adjustment, and that its size tracks the amount of competition rather than the difficulty Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	AND IT MEETS erb2019 HEAD-ON WITHOUT EITHER PAPER KNOWING. This model predicts `the dynamics of ACC activity related to trial sequence effects` - performance on a trial depending on whether the previous one conflicted, which is the congruency sequence effect. erb2019, merged into this corpus this morning, finds that associative priming overlap decides whether a CSE is evidence of control at all. So the corpus holds the computational account and the paper questioning what its central evidence measures, seventeen years apart, neither citing the other. This sense was first attached to the conflict-theory sentence, which does not contain the words `trial sequence effects` at all - the audit caught it before the gate did, which is the one step in this pipeline that has no automated equivalent Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	THE ORDER OF EVENTS IS REPORTED HONESTLY, WHICH IS RARER THAN IT SHOULD BE: `Quotation withheld` The model did not handle frequency; it was extended; then it fitted. A model extended to fit the data it then fits is a weaker result than one that predicted it, and stating the sequence lets a reader price that difference instead of having to reconstruct it from the methods Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	0.85	the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → Cho et al. (2002) sequential-priming choice-discrimination model Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[0]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Usher and McClelland (2001) leaky competing accumulator architecture Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[1]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Braver, Barch, Gray, Molfese, and Snyder (2001) neuroimaging dataset Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[2]`		the tagger's words
concept_edges	response conflict —causes→ cognitive control Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.95 · direction on the measure (stated by the tagger, no quotation): increases · note: THIS IS THE WHOLE ACCOUNT IN ONE TRIPLE AND IT IS THE STRONGER OF THE TWO. 'enabling subsequent…' - conflict is detected, and control changes as a result. Weight 0.95: both endpoints named as words, the causal direction is explicit in 'enabling subsequent', and the sentence is the paper's summary of an established body of evidence rather than a hedge. The ACC sits between the two endpoints in the same sentence and is deliberately not in this triple - it is the route, not a term of the relation, and putting it in would make a three-place claim into a two-place one and lose which part is which. Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but conflict detection ENABLES ADJUSTMENTS in cognitive control; the 'increases' sign is not stated. also in: response conflict · cognitive control	`concept_edges[1]`	0.95	the tagger's words
content_tags	ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA	`content_tags.statistics[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: correlation	`content_tags.statistics[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	partial correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: partial correlation	`content_tags.statistics[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	confidence interval Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: confidence interval	`content_tags.statistics[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	standard score (z score) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standard score (z score)	`content_tags.statistics[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test	`content_tags.statistics[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	p-value Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: p-value	`content_tags.statistics[6]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mean	`content_tags.statistics[7]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Simulated conflict was significantly greater for low- than for high-frequency events in all task conditions. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	The model reproduced the puzzling exception that accuracy to low-frequency targets in the oddball (one-response) task is near perfect and not degraded by low frequency. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Conflict tracked not only global stimulus frequency but also the local sequential history of stimuli. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Empirical ACC data matched the model's conflict predictions (r = .856), accounting for 73% of the variance in the sequential pattern. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Trials whose four preceding stimuli were repetitions had the fastest reaction times and fewest errors, in both human and simulated data. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Without the conflict-monitoring control loop the model predicted performance slightly less well, indicating the loop contributes. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Subjects showed significant adjustments in RT after errors and in error rate after slow trials. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[6]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	response conflict Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: response conflict	`content_tags.definitions[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	repetition priming and alternation priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: repetition priming and alternation priming	`content_tags.definitions[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	conflict Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: conflict	`content_tags.definitions[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	stimulus frequency Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: stimulus frequency	`content_tags.variables[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	sequential history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sequential history	`content_tags.variables[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	reaction time and error rate Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: reaction time and error rate	`content_tags.variables[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	ACC activity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ACC activity	`content_tags.variables[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	simulated conflict Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: simulated conflict	`content_tags.variables[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	lesioned model Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: lesioned model	`content_tags.variables[6]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	65 subjects / 14 subjects — sample sizes of the behavioral and the neuroimaging studies whose data the simulations were fitted to Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	17%, 50%, 83% — the three target-frequency conditions used in each version of the task Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	r = .856 ... 73% — correlation between simulated conflict and reanalyzed ACC activity across matched sequence pairs, and the share of variance it explains Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	16.6% / 6.8% — variance in trial-by-trial reaction time and in error explained by the full model Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	2.5% / 1.5% — the small but reliable extra variance attributable specifically to the conflict-control loop Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	64 out of 65 — subjects for whom adding the conflict-control loop improved the model's RT prediction Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	F(1,63) = 9,143 — test that the low-vs-high frequency conflict difference exceeded the difference under equal frequency Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[6]`		the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

none — every tag was located in the text

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.