The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Psychol.
Sec. Cognition
Volume 15 - 2024 |
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1441023
Investigating the cognitive architecture of verbal fluency: evidence from an interference design on 487 controls
Provisionally accepted- 1 University of Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France
- 2 Laboratoire de neurosciences fonctionnelles et pathologie, University of Picardie Jules Verne, AMIENS, France
- 3 Service de Neurologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) d'Amiens, Amiens, Picardy, France
- 4 Independent researcher, AMIENS (80000), France
Context. Numerous studies have explored the linguistic and executive processes underlying verbal fluency using association designs, which provide limited evidence. To assess the validity of our model (Godefroy et al., 2023), we aimed to refine the cognitive architecture of verbal fluency using an interference design. Method. 487 healthy participants performed letter and semantic fluency tests under the single condition and dual conditions while concurrently performing a secondary task that interferes with speed, semantics, phonology, or flexibility. We examined the effect of such interference on fluency indices including correct responses, clustering, switching, and time course. Results. (1) All secondary tasks decreased fluency (p<0.0001, all), (2) including a simple concurrent task that solely engages the attentional activation system (i.e. speed interference) and (3) a complex concurrent task that affects the ability to alternate (i.e. flexibility interference). (4) Linguistic secondary tasks (which engage phonological and semantic processes, in addition to attention) led to a greater decrease in fluency than speed interference (p<0.0001), (5) with a more pronounced decrease in semantic fluency induced by semantic interference (p<0.0001), and (6) the highest decrease in all types of fluency induced by phonological interference (p<0.0001). In terms of derived indices, (7) speed interference decreased switching without affecting clustering (p<0.0001) and (8) phonological interference mainly affected the first time interval, whereas speed and flexibility interference primarily affected the last time interval (p<0.0001, all). Conclusion. These results, based on an interference design, indicate that letter and semantic fluency involve output lexico-phonological and semantic processes with which the strategic search process interacts, as well as an attentional component necessary to accelerate overall processing. These results also highlight interactions with other executive processes, such as those involved in stimulus dimension alternation, which require further analysis. They support our model and provide information concerning derived indices. The commonly claimed associations of executive function with switching and of semantic ability with clustering are only partially supported by our results. Finally, word production appears to be modulated by different cognitive processes over time, with a prominence of the phonological output lexicon in early production and more demanding processing (i.e., executive functioning) in late production.
Keywords: verbal fluency, Dual Tasks, Linguistic processes, executive processes, switching, Time course, Cognitive Architecture, healthy participants
Received: 30 May 2024; Accepted: 26 Nov 2024.
Copyright: © 2024 DORCHIES, Muchembled, Adamkiewicz, Godefroy and Roussel. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
FLORE DORCHIES, University of Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.