Defining an Ontology of Cognitive Control Requires Attention to Component Interactions
Article first published online: 17 MAR 2011
Copyright © 2011 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.
Topics in Cognitive Science
Volume 3, Issue 2, pages 217–221, April 2011
How to Cite
Badre, D. (2011), Defining an Ontology of Cognitive Control Requires Attention to Component Interactions. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3: 217–221. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01141.x
- Issue published online: 6 APR 2011
- Article first published online: 17 MAR 2011
- Received 18 June 2010; received in revised form 27 August 2010; accepted 23 September 2010
- Cognitive control;
- Prefrontal cortex;
- Executive function;
- Working memory
Cognitive control is not only componential, but those components may interact in complicated ways in the service of cognitive control tasks. This complexity poses a challenge for developing an ontological description, because the mapping may not be direct between our task descriptions and true component differences reflected in indicators. To illustrate this point, I discuss two examples: (a) the relationship between adaptive gating and working memory and (b) the recent evidence for a control hierarchy. From these examples, I argue that an ontological program must simultaneously seek to identify component processes and their interactions within a broader processing architecture.