PMC

Frontoparietal control network coupling modulated by task. The frontoparietal control network is reliably correlated with the default network during autobiographical planning, but not during visuospatial planning, across the trial interval (2.5 – 25.0 seconds). The dorsal attention network is reliably correlated with the frontoparietal control network during visuospatial planning, but not during autobiographical planning.

Mean and SEM of planning task-related percent BOLD signal change within each resting-state network. (A) Default network. (B) Dorsal attention network. (C) Frontoparietal control network. * indicates significant task difference in BOLD signal from baseline.

Task-related brain activity in frontoparietal control network is common to both planning tasks. (A) Activity associated with both planning tasks (Green) at TR 6 (17.5 s). The design scores (B) and temporal brain scores (C) dissociate both autobiographical and visuospatial planning from counting. Real-time patterns of activation at each TR associated with planning are available as and .

Resting-state functional connectivity analysis. Seed regions used to compute the correlation maps are shown to the left of the (A) default, (B) dorsal attention, and (C) frontoparietal control resting-state networks. Task salience is a measure of task-based activity in each resting-state network ROI. Y-axis = extracted mean voxel-salience (10⁻⁴) within each ROI from the first latent variable for the autobiographical and visuospatial planning tasks, and from the second latent variable for the conjunction of both planning tasks relative to counting. Task salience values quantitatively demonstrate that (A) the default network was primarily engaged by autobiographical planning, (B) the dorsal attention network was primarily engaged by visuospatial planning and, (C) the frontoparietal control network was primarily engaged by activity underlying both planning tasks. HF = Hippocampal formation; AB Plan = autobiographical planning; VS Plan = visuospatial planning; AB & VS Plan = activity common to both planning tasks.

Lateral parietal view of the PLS and rsfcMRI results. Left parietal lobe activity for autobiographical planning, visuospatial planning and activity common to these two planning tasks (left); and the default, dorsal attention, and frontoparietal control resting-state networks (right). (A) pIPL activity in autobiographical planning subsumes the pIPL cluster in the default resting-state network. (B) Visuospatial planning engaged the same SPL-to-MT+ arc seen in the posterior portion of the dorsal attention network. (C) The two planning tasks commonly engaged a dorsal segment of the aIPL, part of the frontoparietal control network. (D) Overlap of all three networks for task-related activity and resting-state networks. Yellow represents overlap. The cluster ventral to the aIPL in the posterior middle temporal gyrus is suggestive of a concentric ring fitting within the posterior arc of the dorsal attention network. The pIPL region associated with the default network fills this ring. The rsfcMRI results do not mirror this concentric ring pattern, suggesting that it may be task specific. See also for whole brain convergence images of task activity and resting-state network maps.

Task-related Functional Connectivity Analysis. Seed PLS results illustrate regions that are functionally connected with the default network ROI BOLD value during autobiographical planning, and with the dorsal attention network ROI BOLD value during visuospatial planning. All three conditions for network coupling were met. During autobiographical planning, network coupling between the default and frontoparietal control networks were demonstrated by A) Default seed network autocorrelations (depicted on the medial surface), B) Default network seed connectivity with the frontoparietal control network (depicted on an anterior view of the prefrontal lobes) and C) a relative absence of connectivity with the dorsal attention network (depicted on a lateral posterior surface). During visuospatial planning, network coupling between the dorsal attention and frontoparietal control networks were demonstrated by D) Dorsal attention seed network autocorrelations (lateral posterior), E) Dorsal attention network seed connectivity with the frontoparietal control network (anterior) and F) a relative absence of connectivity with the default network (medial). Outlined regions are the rsfcMRI maps: Blue = Default network on the medial surface, Red = Dorsal attention network on the lateral posterior surface, Green = Frontoparietal control network on the anterior frontal lobes. Images are thresholded at p < .001 (PLS identifies whole brain patterns of activity in a single analytic step, thus, no correction for multiple comparisons is required). See for whole brain results. AB Plan = autobiographical planning; VS Plan = visuospatial planning; R = right; L = left.

Task-related brain activity in default and dorsal attention networks dissociated the planning tasks. (A) Activity associated with autobiographical planning (Blue) and visuospatial planning (Red) at TR 6 (17.5 s). Real-time patterns of activation at each TR associated with planning are available as and . Data are displayed on the dorsal, lateral, medial, and ventral surfaces of the left and right hemispheres of a partially inflated surface map using CARET software (). (B) Design scores for each condition represent the optimal contrast weightings that explain the most task-related variance in BOLD signal. Autobiographical planning was maximally dissociated from visuospatial planning. Counting activity covaried across the same regions as visuospatial planning, although significantly less so. (C) Temporal brain scores convey changes in brain activity related to task at each TR. For each LV, mean brain scores (summary scores of activity across the entire brain of each participant, averaged across participants) show the divergence between experimental conditions over time (Ten 2.5s TRs), and are analogous to hemodynamic response functions typically plotted for individual brain regions.

Task Stimuli. For the visuospatial planning condition, participants performed the Tower of London task. In this condition participants saw the goal configuration for 5 seconds, then the start configuration for a maximum of 15 seconds, and determined the minimum number of moves to match the start with the goal configuration. Participants then indicated the minimum number of moves to solve the puzzle. In the autobiographical planning task condition, participants were presented with a goal state, followed by a combination of two steps and an obstacle related to that goal printed in the discs. Participants integrated the steps and obstacle into an authentic and coherent personal plan to reach that goal. In this example, participants interpreted the goal state “Freedom from Debt” for 5 seconds. For up to 15 seconds, participants integrated the steps “Good job”, “Save Money” as well as the obstacle “Have Fun” into a plan to be free of debt. Next, participants rated the level of detail in their plan. In the Count condition, participants were informed they would count vowels, then random letter sequences appeared in the discs. Next, participants indicated the number of vowels counted. If participants completed any of the tasks prior to 15 seconds, a button was pressed and the screen advanced to the rating screen. Remaining time was added to the inter-trial interval.