The Mind’s CEO: Executive Function

Learning By Doing

Let's play a game. It's super fun...I promise! Download and print this file. Your goal is to cross out all of the lower case d's with two dots above it. Try to be as fast and accurate as possible. Don't forget to time yourself. Ready? Go! [1]

Back to the Front

Stop me if you've heard this one. The left hemisphere of your brain is responsible for logical processing; the right hemisphere is designed for creative and wholistic thinking. While there may be a tiny grain of truth to these over-generalizations, there is a much less talked about difference in brain functioning. As you go from the back of the brain to the front, thinking goes from extremely concrete to highly abstract. 

That's right! The very back of your brain is reserved for visual processing and low-level muscle control. But as you move forward, toward your forehead and eyes, thinking becomes much more complex. This is the location of higher-order thinking skills such as planning, organizing, and problem solving. This area of the brain called the pre-frontal cortex. This is where you will find executive functioning.

Executive function includes several different cognitive processes. They include, but are not limited to, working memory, response suppression, and attentional focus. 

Working Memory

Baddeley's model of working memory features three components (see Fig. 1). There are two slave systems — the visuospatial sketchpad and the articulatory loop — and a central executive. The central executive controls the operation of the slaves systems. It can store and retrieve information from each slave system, and it can also re-represent the same piece of information in different forms (e.g., translating a piece of an image into a word, or vice versa). 

In other words, the central executive must make decisions about the relevance of information and how best to represent it. It must also decide which information needs to be refreshed and maintained in working memory and which information can be safely discarded.

Figure 1. Baddeley's model of working memory.

Response Suppression

We all know how difficult it is for some people to suppress the urge to respond in certain situations. Below are several examples of response suppression, categorized by the domains in which they were found:

Popular Culture: Response suppression failure has made its way into movies (e.g., Roger Rabbit cannot contain himself when faced with the old "shave and a haircut trick") and games. In a previous post on Ironic Processing, we talked about the frustration inherit in the game of Taboo!.

Psychology: We also see examples of response suppression in the materials used in cognitive psychology. The Stroop task is a classic example because, in one variant of the task (i.e., when the color of ink and word conflict), you must suppress the urge to read the word and name the color of ink. 

Neuroscience: The frontal lobe (i.e., the seat of executive functioning), is responsible for response suppression. There is a really interesting example from neuroscience where Phineas Gage had his fontal lobe damaged. After his accident, he became something of a jerk. His behavior strongly suggested that he could not suppress his urges.

Classroom: Response suppression in the classroom is very real, and it can take on many different forms. Behaviorally, little kids (eventually) learn that they must raise their hand before blurting out the answer to the teacher's question. 

A more cognitive example can be found in the world's shortest IQ test: 

1. A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost? _____ cents

When confronted with a question like this, you may feel the need to suppress your intuitive answer (10 cents) and apply your knowledge of algebra to determine the answer ((b+100) + b = 110). In this case, the fast answer isn't the right answer [2].

Attentional Focus 

In a previous post, we talked about the "myth of multitasking." Most people think they can do multiple things at once, but there are severe limitations. You might be able to walk, talk, and chew gum, but you won't be able to listen to a lecture, deeply process the contents, and simultaneously take notes. People are serial processors (as opposed to "parallel processors"). A useful metaphor for attention is that it is a spotlight, and it can only shine on one thing at at time. 

As serial processors, we need to make decisions about which stimuli to pay attention to. This is where executive functioning comes into play. When an alert goes off on our phone, we have to decide to pay attention to it (or not). Unfortunately, that "decision" isn't really a decision anymore. Over time, we become conditioned to immediately abandon what we were thinking about and look at our phone. In other words, we have trained our attentional system to give our phone primary status. Ideally, we would structure our learning environment so that it removes unnecessary distractions. Keeping cellphones on "Do not disturb" mode and out of view is the best way to prevent our attention from being captured.

Attentional distraction can also be internally generated. For example, if you are a minority, and you are reminded of your minority status, perhaps because of an off-hand comment or some other feature in the environment (i.e., you are the only one of your group), then those distracting thoughts can pull attention away from the task at hand. This phenomenon is called stereotype threat, and it has pernicious effects on performance [1].

The final example of attentional focus is on information within a task. Suppose you are asked to solve the following problem: 

Derek has 4 action-adventure video games and 9 board games. Desi has 3 role-playing video games and 2 lawn games. If they combine their games, how many video games do Derek and Desi have? 

Notice that this problem has some very tempting, but completely irrelevant, information. One skill that students need to learn is to ignore the distracting information as they solve the problem. Some teachers might recommend highlighting the relevant information (or crossing out the irrelevant information). The goal is to help the attentional system stay focused on the relevant bits.

The Classroom Connection

How can we structure the classroom environment to support the development of executive functioning? Here are a few recommendations:  

1. We should strive to limit the number of distractions in the classroom. Put smartphones away and out of sight. 
2. If the mode of instruction is primarily a lecture, then tell your students not to take notes during the lecture [2]. Instead, ask that they listen to what you are saying. After class is over, students should then be given a chance to write down everything they remember. I assume this is a controversial recommendation, so expect students to push back.
3. Response suppression and attentional focus are both skills that can be learned. One way to develop these skills is mindfulness training, which is starting to gain some empirical support [4]. 

In summary, executive function is a critical component to higher-order thinking and reasoning. In other words, it definitely deserves the corner office! 

Share and Enjoy!

Dr. Bob

Going Beyond the Information Given

[1] This "game" is a test of executive function because you have to hold in working memory the symbol-to-match. The stimuli were created to be highly confusable; therefore, you must suppress certain responses (e.g., the "d" with only a single dot above it, or a "d" with two dots below it). I heavily borrowed the design from the "d2" test of executive function: Lyons, E. M., Simms, N., Begolli, K. N., & Richland, L. E. (2018). Stereotype threat effects on learning from a cognitively demanding mathematics lesson. Cognitive science, 42(2), 678-690.

[2] The "intuitive" versus "algebraic" answer is a good example of the distinction Daniel Kahneman makes in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow. 

[3] I was fortunate enough to take a course from Herbert A. Simon. He didn't let us take notes during his lectures precisely because we are serial processors. In other words, he applied the findings from cognitive science (a field he helped start!) to his own class. 

[4] Bellinger, D. B., DeCaro, M. S., & Ralston, P. A. (2015). Mindfulness, anxiety, and high-stakes mathematics performance in the laboratory and classroom. Consciousness and cognition, 37, 123-132.

The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man Paradox: Ironic Processing

Learning By Doing

Let's play a simple game. There's only one rule: Don't think about white bears. I will give you a minute.

Okay, so how did you do? Did you think about white bears? If you didn't think about white bears, what did you think about instead? What was your strategy? Maybe you should teach your strategy to Dr. Ray Stantz from the movie Ghostbusters (1984).

"I couldn't help it. It just popped in there." --Dr. Ray Stantz

Why, oh why, did Dr. Raymond Stantz conjure up the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man? All he had to do was clear his mind! WHY!? It's easy. He fell victim to a rather pernicious feature of the human mind. Sometimes, when you actively try to suppress thinking about something, your mind goes ahead and thinks about it. If you ever had the experience of not being able to stop laughing in church, then you've experienced ironic processing. Ironic Processing is the cognitive phenomenon of your mind betraying you and doing exactly the opposite of what you tell it. 

The game company Hasbro cleverly figured out a way to monetize ironic processing. They designed a board game aptly called Taboo. If you haven't had the frustrating experience of playing this game, the rules are as follows. You are given a word, and your goal is to get your partner to say that word. But here's the catch. You aren't allowed to use certain words as clues. For example, suppose I want you to say the word "Sweet." I am not allowed to use the words: Sugary, Tea, Nice, Sour, Sixteen. How evil is that? I'm terrible at this game because as soon as I read the list of verboten words, I immediately want to say them. Why? Ironic processing.

"Isn't it ironic...dontcha think?" --Alanis Morissette 

So what is going on? Why doesn't your brain do what it's told? According to one theory, the mind draws upon two separate processes to direct our behavior [1]. The first is an action-oriented process. It has a goal, and it motivates us to take steps toward that goal. Let's call this the "Operate" process. The second process needs to evaluate whether the goal has been achieved. Let's call this the "Test" process. The Operate and Test processes work in tandem to achieve a goal.

The problem arises when the Test process is checking Operate's progress before the Operate process has completely finished. In other words, Test is the annoying kid in the back seat asking, "Are we there yet?" Thus, if you are actively trying to suppress a thought, and the Test process kicks in to evaluate, then it ends up causing a violation of the thought suppression. By testing if you aren't thinking about white bears, you are now in violation of the rule. The Test process puts the "irony" in ironic processing.

The S.T.E.M. Connection

What is the connection to education? Put yourself in the shoes of a student who has test anxiety. It might be tempting to advise that student to not think about his or her anxiety. You could tell him or her to avoid negative thoughts about failure or the implications of failing. I'm sure you can see the problem with that advice. It would be analogous to telling the student not to think about "white bears." The problem is, if the student is thinking about failing, then they clearly aren't thinking about the material on the test. As we have seen in previous posts, working memory and attention are severely limited resources. If they are focused on the wrong information, then there will be fewer resources available to do well on the test.

What advice should we give instead? We might take a cue from high-pressure sports where the athlete faces negative thoughts (e.g., "Don't screw up. Don't screw up"). The advice for them is to focus on something (e.g., a word or concept) that is related to the task a hand [2]. In other words, if the student is worried about failing, then give that student something to think about instead.

It's not easy to do, obviously. But knowing how ironic processing works might help students understand how their mind betrays them. More importantly, knowing about the Operate and Test processes might also help students formulate their own strategies for handling situations when processing turns ironic. Once they have those strategies in hand, perhaps they can teach them to Dr. Stantz so he doesn't "accidentally" destroy downtown New York.

Share and Enjoy! 

Dr. Bob

Going Beyond the Information Given

[1] Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101(1), 34.

[2] Dugdale, J. R., & Eklund, R. C. (2002). Do not pay any attention to the umpires: Thought suppression and task-relevant focusing strategies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 24(3), 306-319.

The Myth of Multitasking: Serial Attention

"Achtung!" --U2

Cognitive Science is awesome for (at least) two reasons. First, the field likes to debate all sorts of binary questions (e.g., Does the mind use symbols or not? When reading, do we process surface features or semantic features?). Second, cognitive scientists come up with all sorts of crazy metaphors to better understand the complex inner-workings of the mind. The topic today is awesome for both reasons. Early investigations into attention tried to answer binary questions, such as: Is attention parallel or serial? Does information get selected for deeper analysis early in the process or later? Also, they came up with some pretty cool metaphors to describe attention, such as switches, filters, attenuators, and spotlights. 

Before we dive in, let's make a distinction between information selection and information processing. We've all heard the phrase "selective attention" (or, the close cousin "selective hearing"). It seems that some people have an amazing ability to pay attention to only one thing at a time. For example, if your roommate is texting her friend, she might not even notice when you ask a direct question. When texting, your roommate has decided, consciously or not, to select the information emanating from her phone. Processing information, on the other hand, refers to the analysis and response to that information, such as a replying to a text message. 

Now that we've laid the groundwork, let's look at the fascinating world of auditory and visual attention! 

"Were you listening to me, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?" --Morpheus

So we know that deep down, at its core, the attentional system is massively parallel. It doesn't matter how engrossed you are in a task, you will respond to a very loud siren and a red flashing light. Not much analysis needs to take place because your attentional system is always on high alert to keep you alive. If something threatening comes your way, odds are your attention will be captured and you will respond immediately [1].

Going beyond all the loud noises and lights, the attentional system also has to be designed to help you select and process information. Most evidence suggests that there is a bottleneck somewhere in the attentional system such that, once selected, we can only process one stream of information at a time. In early auditory attention experiments, researchers asked people to listen to a recording where they shadow, or repeat, the message in one ear and ignore the message played in the other ear. You can try it for yourself here. After the task was over, the researchers asked about the information in the ignored ear. Most could say if the voice was male or female, and give other surface characteristics of the sound, but not much more than that (i.e., the content of the message). 

A similar finding has also been demonstrated for visual attention. Here is one of the coolest demonstrations of this phenomena. You need to experience it for yourself.

==================================================

Simon's Visual Cognition Lab

==================================================

This is a very powerful demonstration of the effect of a goal (e.g., count the number of passes) on the selection of information. It also demonstrates that we can only process one stream of information at a time. 

A STEM Example

I'll be honest, selectively attending to a single stream of information is one of the most fundamental principles of education. You can't learn what you don't pay attention to! That seems almost too simple to state, but it seems like it's easy to forget. 

Knowing that we are serial processors is useful when evaluating educational applications. A great example is duolingo, which is an app that teaches (or re-teaches) a second language. Each task is presented in a simple interface where the learner concentrates on only one goal at a time. Once that task is finished, the learner progresses to the next task. Again, the app keeps things simple and doesn't try to split the student's attention across too many sources of information. 


Share and Enjoy! 

Dr. Bob

For More Information

[1] The lone example I can think of are some Tibetan monks who are able to get deep into a meditative state where they do not respond to loud noises (see Chapter 1 in Search Inside Yourself for a description).