Skip Navigation


Brain Advance Access originally published online on December 22, 2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
127/3/517    most recent
awh060v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (15)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ramsey, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Kahn, R. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ramsey, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Kahn, R. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Brain, Vol. 127, No. 3, 517-525, 2004
© 2004 Guarantors of Brain
doi: 10.1093/brain/awh060

Neurophysiological factors in human information processing capacity

N. F. Ramsey1, J. M. Jansma2, G. Jager1, T. Van Raalten1 and R. S. Kahn1

1 Functional Neuroimaging Section, Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands and 2 Laboratory of Functional and Molecular Imaging, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, MD, USA

Correspondence to: Nick F. Ramsey, PhD, Functional Neuroimaging Section, Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Room A.01.126, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands E-mail: n.ramsey{at}azu.nl

What determines how well an individual can manage the complexity of information processing demands when several tasks have to be executed simultaneously? Various theoretical frameworks address the mechanisms of information processing and the changes that take place when processes become automated, and brain regions involved in various types of information processing have been identified, as well as sequences of events in the brain. The neurophysiological substrate of human information processing capacity, i.e. the amount that can be processed simultaneously, is, however, unresolved, as is the basis of inter-individual variability in capacity. Automatization of cognitive functions is known to increase capacity to process additional tasks, but behavioural indices of automatization are poor predictors of processing capacity in individuals. Automatization also leads to a decline of brain activity in the working memory system. In this study, we test the hypothesis that processing capacity is closely related to the way that the brain adjusts to practice of a single cognitive task, i.e. to the changes in neuronal activity that accompany automatization as measured with functional MRI (fMRI). Using a task that taxes the working memory system, and is sensitive to automatization, performance improved while activity in the network declined, as expected. The key finding is that the magnitude of automatization-induced reduction of activity in this system was a strong predictor for the ability to perform two different working memory tasks simultaneously (after scanning). It explained 60% of the variation in information processing capacity across individuals. In contrast, the behavioural measures of automatization did not predict this. We postulate that automatization involves at least two partially independent neurophysiological mechanisms, i.e. (i) streamlining of neuronal communication which improves performance on a single task; and (ii) functional trimming of neuronal ensembles which enhances the capacity to accommodate processing of additional tasks, potentially by facilitating rapid switching of instruction sets or contexts. Finally, this study shows that fMRI can provide information that predicts behavioural output, which is not provided by overt behavioural measures.

Key Words: working memory; information processing capacity; fMRI; individual variation; multitasking; automatization

Abbreviations: ACC= anterior cingulate cortex; AUT = automatization; CT = control task; DLPFC = dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; fMRI = functional MRI; NT = novel task; PT = practised task; WM = working memory

Received August 26, 2002. Revised August 15, 2003. Accepted October 14, 2003.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. PsychiatryHome page
J. D. Ragland, A. R. Laird, C. Ranganath, R. S. Blumenfeld, S. M. Gonzales, and D. C. Glahn
Prefrontal Activation Deficits During Episodic Memory in Schizophrenia
Am J Psychiatry, August 1, 2009; 166(8): 863 - 874.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cereb CortexHome page
H.-Y. Tan, J. H. Callicott, and D. R. Weinberger
Dysfunctional and Compensatory Prefrontal Cortical Systems, Genes and the Pathogenesis of Schizophrenia
Cereb Cortex, September 1, 2007; 17(suppl_1): i171 - i181.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cereb CortexHome page
A. M. C. Kelly and H. Garavan
Human Functional Neuroimaging of Brain Changes Associated with Practice
Cereb Cortex, August 1, 2005; 15(8): 1089 - 1102.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.