Back

Interaction of involuntary and executive attention during development

Schöllkopf, U.; Widmann, A.; Bidet-Caulet, A.; Wetzel, N.

2026-07-22 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.07.19.739397 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Attentional control requires the fine-tuned interaction of attentional networks supporting alertness, orienting and higher-level executive control. This study examined the interaction of executive attention, comprising inhibition, and involuntary orienting towards unexpected deviant sounds in children (6-8-years, N=30), adolescents (10-12-years, N=39) and adults (18-34-years, N=35). An auditory equiprobable Go/Nogo-Oddball paradigm was employed to investigate executive (Go/Nogo) and involuntary (Oddball) attention and their interaction. Event-related potentials (ERP) in the EEG, pupil dilation and behavioral data were analyzed using Bayesian statistics. Deviant sounds evoked an involuntary attentional orienting reflected by the ERP component P3a and decreased performance in all age groups. The distraction effect diminished with age. Pupil dilation in response to deviant and target sounds were modulated by involuntary and executive attention but showed no interaction. In the EEG, frontal Nogo-N2 and Nogo-P3 effects, which reflect response inhibition, appeared in standard trials but not in deviant trials. This interaction suggests that response inhibition is reduced by involuntary attention orienting. While all age groups showed similar amplitudes of the Nogo-N2 effect, the subsequent Nogo- P3 effect, which has been associated to motor inhibition, was absent in the 6-8-year-olds. Age differences observed in latencies of the Nogo-N2 effect but not in the latencies of the Nogo- P3 effect (between adolescents and adults) indicate distinct developmental trajectories of the response inhibition mechanisms underlying the Nogo-N2 and Nogo-P3 effects throughout childhood and adolescence. The present data provide novel insights into the interaction between executive and orienting attention networks in the auditory modality during development.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.