See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229614423

Executive Attention and Effortful Control:

Linking Temperament, Brain Networks, and
Genes

Article in Child Development Perspectives September 2007

DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2007.00002.x

CITATIONS READS

82 147

3 authors, including:

Mary K Rothbart Michael Posner

University of Oregon University of Oregon
186 PUBLICATIONS 20,168 CITATIONS 430 PUBLICATIONS 66,609 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

An information theory account of cognitive control View project

Development of attentional networks and individual differences in temperament. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mary K Rothbart on 17 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 c l I I L D D E \ - EL 0 l ' t l l U N ' f p [ ] t t s p E C T I v H s

Executive Attention and

Effortful Control : Linkirg
TemperAmert, Brain l{etworlcs,
and Cenes
Mary K. Rothbart, Brad E. Sheese. and Michael I. Posner

Uniuersitl'oJ'Oregon

AssrRAcr-Young chilclrenos increasing ubility to regu- fearful, has only a brief attention span, antl cries in responseto
late their thoughts, feelings, a nd belmaior is a hallmarh of cven moderate levels of stimulating play; another child seeks out
d.eaelopment thclt is of critical importance to their social- exciting events, is not easily distracted,and enjoys vigorous plav-
ization. Recent adaances in neuroimaging and molecular These reactions and capacities reflect basic dimensions of the
genetics hold promise for drawing together different child's temperament.Temperamentis defined as constitutionally
Ieaels of analysis of the ernerglence and grototh of self- based individual differences in emotional, motor, and attentional
regulatiort. In this article, ue reaieu research releaant to reactiuitt'to stimulus events (measuredby latency, intensitv, and
our eppr oe c h to under st aruling self-re pgilatio n, b eginning reco\rery of response) and self-r eg ulalion (p rocessesthat nroduIate
with an examination of the temperament construct of reactivitl'; Rothban & Bates,2(X)6;Rothbart & Derwbern', l981).
Effortful Control (EC). We trace the deaelopment of EC Reactive processesare more or lessautomaticresponses,whereas
and its links to on a,natomically defined attentional sel{-regulation as discussed in this article involves voluntary
netuork and itlentifu genes tlmt muy contribute to indi- control. The dimensions of temperamentdevelop over tinre and
aidual differences in the efficiency of this netusork. Ve are influenced b1' both genes and experience.
also report on h,ow intensention may inJluence a central In this review, we focus on Effortful Control (EC), a dimension
component of self-regtlation, the executiae attention of temperament implicated in many forms of self-regulation. We
netuork. AlthouE;h much more uork remains to be done, first briefly describe the early development of temperament,
we belieoe that the importance of the questions addressed noting that EC is not observedby caregiversuntil the toddler and
and the recent progress in understan.ding self-regulation preschooi years. Once the capacity deveiops, it is linked to
make this o aery exciting arect of research. imlrortant developrnental processessuch as the developrnent of
personality (Rothbart, in press) and conscience (Kochanska,
K EfT'OR DS- t emp e r atnent ; se lf- r egulo t io n ; de u elo pm e nt ;
Murray, & Harlan, 2000). We next describe links between EC
per sono,lity ; psychopathology ; effirtful con tr ol ; mole.cu-
and the executive attention network, illustrating how researchon
Iar genetics; executiue ettention; irnaging strrdies;anterior
brain networks and genetic analysis illuminate cleveiopmental
cir.sulate gyrus
changes in the executive attention system,allorving regulation of
action. thoughts, and emotions. Finally, we examine efforls to
enhance executive attention through attention training.
Fronr earlv infancv, children differ frorn one another in their
expression of ernotion, activity, and attcntion. One chilcl is
DEVELOPMENT OF EARLY TEMPERAMENT

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressetl to Mary

K. Rothbart, Departrnent of Psychologv, 1227 Universit_v of Oregon. Anall'sis of caregiver reports of children's temperament has
Eugene, OR 97403; e-mail: marvroth@uoregon.edu. revealed three higher order factors (Ahadi, Rothbart, & Ye,

er 2007, Copyrightthe Author(s)

Journal cornpilationC 2007. Societr for Researchin Child Development Volume l-Number 1, Pages 2-i
 NIarv K. Rothbart" Bratl E. Shee"e- anrl i\lichael l. Posnt,r'
1993; Rothbart. Ahadi, I-lershev.& Fisher,2001).'l'he 6rst trvo
factors,which begin to emeriein the earlv months,are reacuve:
(a) Surgency'/Extrar.ersion,
including activity level, sociability,
impulsivit,v. ancl enjovrnent of high-intensitv pleasures and (b)
Negative Affecti vity, inclu ding fear. anger/frustration, cliscorn-
fort, and sadness. The third fac'tor is the later-emerging self-
regulatorvcomponentwe have labeled EC, including inhibitory
control, the abi-titytri frrr:rrs
and shift attention.and sensitiritv to,
an<lplr:asurcin, Iou'-intensitystimuli.
As newlxrrns.infants shorvirrdividual differencesin iritabilitv,
arousal to stimuli. and orienting; lry 24 months of age. thcv
exhibit clear differences in surgent responses.including positive
effect, approach (reaching fbr objects), and activity level.
Considerable stabilit,v is found for surgent terrdencies between
inl'ancy and chiltlhood (Putnarn,Rothbart, & Gartstcin" in press;
Rothbart, Dern'bern'. & Hershel'.2000). F-eardevtlops later in
the first year, rvith inhihition of infants' approach: Sonre in{ants
rvhohad previouslv approache<lnovel objectsrapidly, for exarr4rle. lunctions to nronitor and resolve conflict between other brain
may now approachthem slorvlv,or not at all. Thev may also exhibit
distress rvhen confronted rvith novel or threatening olrjects. Fear-
related inhibition shows considerable stability across r:hildhood motion and the supprcssion of activation in other networks, may
and even into late adolescence(Kagan& Fox,2006). Fear sen'esas
an earlv cleveloping control mechanism that is important to earlr.
socialization.Fearlul children, for example.are more likely to show
early signs of conscience(Kochanska,1997).
Beyond the inhibiton, control provided by fear, the later
emergenccol E(l makes a crucial contribution to socialization.
As EC develops in the 2nd or ilrd years of life and beyond,
children can dcplov their attention more voluntarill-, allowing
them to take in additional sources of information, plan more
efficient strategies for coping, and thus regulate reactive
emotion and actions (Rufi & Rothbart, 1996). I1C. delined as
the ability to inhibit a donrinant responsein order to activate
a subdominant response, to plan, and to detect errors, shows
considerable development in the preschool vears (see review bv
Rothbart, Posner, & Kieras, 2006). Whereas children younger
than 2.5 years show considerable difficulty in inhibiting
a dominant action (e.g., playing rvith tovs) in order to per{orm
''Put
an instructed action (e.g., the toys away, norr'). children
become increasingly able to control their behavior and to both
inhibit and activate responsesunder instluctions.
Levels of EC are positively related to the development of
conscience (Kochanska et al., 2000) and of empathv. social
competence,theory of mind. and compliance. Low EC is also
related to higher aggression.more frequent problcm bchaviors.
and psychopathology(seereviews by Eisenberg,Smith, Sadovsky,
& Spinrad, 2004; Muris & Ollendick, 2005; Rothbart & Bates,
2006; Rothbart et aI.,2006), whereas high EC is related to lower
negative ernotionality and ideation (Rothbart & Sheese.2006).
These relations shorv the central importance of F,C in the
development and socialization of the child.
In isolation, however. neither the developmental course of EC
nor its links to adaptive outcomes provide much understanding
Volume l-Number l- Pages2-7
ol the specific rnechanisrnstlrrough rvhich EC develops. To
address this queslion, rve have proliosed that the roots of EC Iie
in the functioning of the executive attention nel.rvork(Posner&
Rcrtlrbart,1998.2007a, 2007b; Rothbart, Dt-'rryberry,& Posner.
l99rl). In the next three sections,we describe advancesin our
understandingof executive attention and its relation to EC and
discussthe measurementof its develoomentalcourse.
THE ANATOMY OF EXECUTIYE ATTENTION
The executive attention network is one of three distinct neural
attention networks, each one having a different function,
a different nt-.ural anatomv, and diiTerent neuromodulators
(Posner & l"an. in press: Rueda. Posner, & Rothbarr, 2004).
The first two networks, the alerting and orienting networks,
involve maintenance of an alert state and orienting to sensory
and internal events.The third, thc cxecutive attention network,
rtetworks(Botrvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter, & Cohen" 2001).
'l'his
conflict-resolutionfunction, which includes both the pro-
be central to conscious self-regulaton eflbrts.
Neuroimaging has helped identily the areas of the brain that
are active uft-'n participants are asked to complete tasks that
require sorne form of cognitive control. These tasks-for exam-
ple, the Strooptask. the spatial conflict task, and the flanker effect
in the Attention Network Test (ANT)-tvpicallv involve resolving
conflict presented bv competing stimuli. ([n the Stroop task, e.g.,
children reail lists of various color names printed in different
colors and must say the name of the color each word is printed
in. not the color named by the word. Conflict arises when the
color name is incongruent with its ink, requiring children to
inhihit their natural tendency to say the word itself.) Cognitive-
control tasks such as these activate a comrnon brain network
(!'an, Flombaum. McCandliss, Thomas, & Posner, 2003; Fan,
McCandliss, Fossella, t'lombaum. & Posner, 2005) consisting of
the anterior cingulate gyrus and the lateral prefrontal areas.The
anterior cingulate lies on the brain's midline below the r:erebral
cortex, rvhereasthe prefrontal areas are in antcrior parts ofcerebral
cortex. The activation of these areas during cognitive-control tasks
is consistentwith a number of theories relating anterior cingulate
activationto the monitoringor resolvinpJ
ofconflict arnongcognitive
responses(Botvinick et al., 2001; Holroyd & Coles, 20O21'van
Veen & Carter, 2002). There is also evidenc:e that a more ventral
anterior area of the cingulate is activated when tasks involve
emotional components and more dorsal areas when tasks are more
purelv cognitive (Bush, Luu, & Posner,2000).
These findings rvith adults led us to label the brain network
involving the anterior cingulate and other frontal areas as the
executive attention network and to stress its relation to EC and
self-regulation (Posner & Fan, in press; Rothbart & Rueda,
2005; Rueda, Posner, et a1.,2004). The idea that the anterior
cingulate is related to self-regulation is also supported by
 Link
'u )frarnent. Brain Netrvrtrks, and Cenes
research on both cognitive and entotiotral regulation. For
example. rvhe,nadults are asked to tn' to cotttrol thcir positive
(Beauregard,I-evesque,&' I3ourgouin,2tX)l)or negative(Ochsner,
Bunge, f}'oss, & Gabrieli, 2002) feelings, activation of the
anterior cingulate coincides rvith their cfforts to do so.
Olher neuroimaging research during the performance of
cognitive or entotiorral self-regulatory activities also points to
the executivefunctiorrof this network.In one studr'.parlicipants
were asked to altcrnatelv attend to either visual or auditory
informatiorr.Wherr they attendedto visual inlbrmation. imaging
sholved a strong funt'tional connection between the cingulate
and the visual coftex, and rvhen they attended to auditoty
irrformation, the conltection changed to one betwcen the cingu-
late and the auditrll corlex (Crottaz-Herbette & Menon,2006).
A similar finding of functional connections bctwcen cingulate
and limbic areas has been reported during a task involving
emotional stimuli (Etkin, Egncr, Peraza, Kandel, & Hirsch,
2006). These studies suggest that the cingulate and associated
areas ol the executive attention network function to modulate
activation in other brain networks and that this modulation may
underlie both cognitive and emotional self-regulation.
DEVELOP}IENT OF EXECUIIVE ATTENTION
AND ITS RELATION TO EC
The association ltetween the executive attention network and
self-regulation has allowed researchers to use executive atten-
tion tasks to trace children's developing ability to regulate their
thoughts and feelings. Gerardi-Caulton (2000) carried out some
ofthe {irst research linking [iC to underlying brain networks of
executive attcntion using a spatial conflict task (see also
Rothbart, Ellis. Rueda, & Posner, 2003). This task is similar
in nature to thc Stroop task, except that because children of
preschool age do not typically read, location and identity, rather
than word meaning and ink color, served as the test dimensions.
Children sat in front of two response keys, one located to the
child's left and the other to the right. Each key bore a different
picture, and on everr trial, a picture identical to that on one key
appeared on either the left or the right side of the screen.
Children were rewarded for responding to the identity of the
visual stimulus, regardless of whether the key' was on the same
side (congruent) or the opposite side (incongruent) of the visual
stimulus (Cerardi-Caulton, 2000).
The effort required to resolve conflict between the competing
dimensions in this task was reflected in reduced accuracy and
slowed reaction tirnes for spatially incompatible trials relative to
those for spatiall."*compatible trials. Children 24 months of age
tended to pelseverate on a single response,whereas 36-month-
olds per{omred at high accuracy levels but respondedmore slowly
and with reduced accuracy to incornpatible trials. At 3 years of
age and older, the time required to resolve conflict was negatively
correlated with parent reports of temperamental EC and posi-
tively related to negative effect. Greater efficiencv in spatial
on
conflicl perfomrancervasalso lelatetl to higher'pt:tlitrtttrtttt',,
laboratorl' tests of inhibitor-l t'ontrol ((ieranli-Caulton, 2(X)0).
Similar conespondencebet'rveenparetrtreports of temperamental
EC and per{omrance on laboratory attentir.rntasks has been
shorvnwith 24-,:lO-, and 36-month-olds (Rothbart et al.,2fi)13);
3- and S-,vear-olds(Chang & Burns, 2005); and 7-year-olds
(Gonzales,Fur-'ntes,Canaza, & Estevez, 2001).
Researc,husing a version of the ANT has also traced tht:
development of executive attention into the primary school
period (Ruecla,Fan, et al., 2004). In this research. children
pressed a key to indicate which direction a target {ish was
swimming in while surroundedby other{ish (flankers)swirnming
in either the sanre (congruent) or the opposite (incongruent)
direction as the target. Cues prior to thc presentation of the
target allowed the rneasurement of all three attentional net-
rvorks: orienting. alerting, and executive attention. Reaction
times for the children were much longer than lbr adults, but they
showed similar independence among the three networks. Chil-
dren between 4 and 7 years of age also had much larger scoresfor
aleting and conflict than adults, suggesting that they have
difficulty in maintaining the alert state when not warned of
a new target. as well as in resolving conflict. Ilather surprisingly,
the ability to resolve conflict on the flanker task remained about
the same from age 7 to adulthood.
CAN EXECUTIYE ATTENTION BE MEASURED IN
INFANCY?
Do children younger than 2.5 years possess a brain system
similar to executive attention related to their ability to resolve
conflict? It is difficult to measureaspectsofexecutive attention
during infancy. Many of the dimensions delining EC in children,
such as the child's conformity to parental demands, are also not
easily observed in infancy. In addition, infants are unable to
follow instructions to perform con{lict tasks.
However, research on infants' abilitv to monitor errors,
a hallmark of the executive attention network (Cehring, Gross,
Coles, Meyer, & Donchin, 1993; llolroyd & Coles, 2002),
suggests that the anterior cingulate is functioning well belbre
the end of the lirst year. ln adults, detecting one's own errors in
cognitive tasks consistently activates areas of the anterior
cingulate (Dehaene, Posner, & Tucker, 1994), as does external
feedback that an error has been made (Badigaiyan & Posner,
1997). To examine the neural system involved in infants' error
detection, Berger, Tzur, and Posner (2006) used a behavior task
adapted from W,vnn (1992). Infants between 6 and 9 months of
age were shorvna puppet that was then hiddcn behind a screen.
Subsequently, they obsen'ed a second puppet being hidden
behind the screen. Infants looked longer when the screen was
lifted to reveal only one puppet (incorrcct trial) than when two
puppets were revealed (correct trial). l,ooking times were
systematicallv longer for incorrect trials, and in addition, the
same frontal electrode sites known to be active for error
Volunre l-Number I, Pages2-7
 N I a r ' ) K . l l o t h l r a l t " I J r a d E . S h e e s t ' .a n t l N I i < : h a e l . l ) o s l e r
detectionin arluits shorvedactir.ationin the infants.The authols
concluderl that the frontal anatomv responsil-rle lbr error
detection in adults and involving the anterior cingulate could
be obsened at 7 months.
We are currently examining horv executivr: attention, as
assessedthrough anticipatory looking, is related to emotional important to dctermine whc-ther speci{ir: training experiences
and hehavioral regulation in 7- to 9-rnonth-olds (Sheese, can influence the efficiencv of the executive attention network
Rothbat, & Posner, 2006). Prcliminary analr.ses suggest that during the tirne it is devt-.loping.
infants showinghigher levels ofanticipatorl'Iooking to Iocations
in a repeated sequence are morc likelv to regulate reaching
toward a novel tov placed in frorrt of thcrn and to show thumb-
sucking, looking away, and other fornrs of self-soothing when
presentedwith frightening stimuli. These results are consistent
with findings lrom childhr,,od,showing that higher levels of
executive attention are broarlly related to behavioral and
ernotional regulation (Rothbart & Rueda, 2005). We plan to
link these early indicators to latr:r executive attention by
administering the ANT to the sanrechildren at age 4.
GENETIC CONTRIBUTIONS TO EXECUTIYE
ATTENTION
Behavioral genetic stutlies indicate substantialgenetic.t.ontri-
butions to both executiveattention and EC (Fan, Wu, Fossella,
& Posner, 2001; Rothbart & Bates. 2006). Molecular genetic
studies in adults have now also identified spccific tlopamine-
and serotonin-related genes that influence performance on
conflict tasks (see Posner, Rothbart. & Sheese. 2007, lbr
a review). In two different studies employing r:on{lict-related
tasks, alleles of the catechol-o-rnethvl transferase gene were
related to the ability to resolve conflict (Blasi et al., 2005;
Diamond, Briand, Fossella,& Gehibach.2004). Another study
showed a significant relation bctween the dopamine transpofier
gene and executive atlention as measured by the child ANT
(Rueda, Rothbart, McCandliss,Saccamanno,& Posner,2005).
In addition, research has suggested that genes related to
serotonintransmissionalso influenceexecutiveattention (Canli
et aI.,2005; Reuter, Ott, Vaitl, & Hennig,2007). Wc have found
(Sheese,Voelker, Rothbart, & Posner,in press) an interesting
gene-environment interaction in w.hich parenting quality influ-
enced the activit.vlevel and impulsivitv of 18- to 20-month-olils
with one allele (seven repeats) of the dopamine 4 recepror gene
but was not influential in children without this allele. We are
currently examining how these and similar genes influence
attention in infants and children from 7 months to 4 years as part
of our longitudinal examinationof early executive attention.
TRAINING OF EXECUTIVE ATTENTION
Anatomically, the network involving resolution of conflict over-
laps with brain ar-easrelated to general intelligence (Duncan
et al., 2000), and there is considerable evidence that the
executive attention network is important in the acquisition of
Volunre l-Number l. l'aees 2-7
schoolsubjects.such as litelacr, (Mr:Candliss.Beck. Srrndak,&
Per{etti,2003), as well as in a wide varietl' of other subjectsthat
draw upon general intelligence (Duncan et a1..2000).Because
training of attention, either explicitlv or implicitly, is often a part
of the school curriculum (Posner & Rothbtrrt, 2007a), it is
To examine this question.rve (Rueda er aI..2005) developed
and tested a 5-day training intervention baseclon computerized
exercises usetl to train monkeys for space travel (Rumbaugh &
Washburn, 1995). The exercises rve userl focused on factors
such as anticipation, conflir:t resolution, stirnulus discrimina-
tion, and inhibitorl- control. (ln one training session, e.g.,
children nroved a cadoon cat across a computer screen with
a joystick. anticipatingwhere a duck swimming on a pond would
cmerge.In another,they rounded up sheep hidden behind bales
ofhay, first clicking awav the bales and then r.licking the sheep
into a pen as quickl-v as possible-except when the animal
behind the bale was revealr:d to be a woll. Ea<:h exercise
consistedof increasinglevels of complexity,with the duck, e.g.,
eventually swimming invisibly underwater and the sheep
sometimes turning into a rvolf.) We tested the effects of this
attention training on ,1,-and 6-year-old children, during a period
of major development of executive attention, hoping to observe
improvement in conflict resolution. as measuretl by the ANT,
along with changes in the underlying network and generaliza-
t i o n t o o t h e r a s p e ( ' t 5o l c o g r r i t i o n .
Brain recordings havc. sholvn that the N2 cornlx)nenr over
midfrontal electrode sites comes from a generator in the anterior
cingulateand is related to the resolutionofconflict (van Veen &
Carter, 2002). Our tests found that 6-year-rilds who had
undergone attention training showed evidence of an improvetl
executive attention netrvork, as indexed b.v-.
the N2 cornponent
found in adults on incongruentANT trials. No such cvidence of
improvement was found for 4-year-olds or untrainr:d 6-year-
olds. The traine<l group also had a significantlv greater
improvement in intelligence scores than did the control group,
suggesting that training effects had genelalized to cognitive
processing far removed from the training activity.
We hope to rcplicate our results with a larger cohort of children,
continuing to explore how genes and experience influence the
developmentofattentional networks.Our results so far have led us
to believe that attention training cnuld be esptr:ially benefir,ialfor
those children with poorer initial efficiency, including those who
have pathologies involving attentional networks, genetic back-
grounds associated with poorer attentional performance, or
deficits related to cognitivc or emctional deprivation.
SUMNTARYAND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Researchdescribed in this article links EC. a broad dimension
of temperament oftcn measured by adult reports of children's
J
 l",tLlttgft",l*r,t-
self-regulatir.e lrt-'havior,to an undellving brairr network (erec-
utive attenlion) antl to importaril aspectsof individual differences
'lhis
in behavior during develoJrnrent. multilevel approach
provides a framervork for future rcsearch into the origins of
self-regulation.Cenetic contributionsto executir.eattention.as
well as the effects ofattention training, were also reviewed. The
same genes that influence individual difl'erences in executivt:
attentionare also likely to be involved in the developrnentol the
executive attention network in infancv and earlv childhood. It
will be irnportant to trace this development in terms of brain
anatonry and the changing ability of children to inhibit or
ar:tivatc responses,to develop empathl, for others, and to exhibit
prosocial rather than antisor:ial behaviors.
Self-regulation is a process central to the development of
children. Understanding it rvithin and between levels mav
provide important new insights into many forms of develop-
mental pathologv, sur:has autisnr. childhood schizophrenia"and
attention delicit hyperactivity disorder, and help leacl to
strategiesfor their remediation. In addition, it is imporlant to
learn how school performance can be influenced bv attention
training, the best way of combining methodsof training, and the
optimal duration of training lbr positive outcomes.We believe
that attention training, especiallyrvhencombined with instmc-
tion-promoting prosocial behavior, may serve as a central goal of
preschool education. Indeed, some of the attcntional methods
used in central Europe preschools and in the Montessori schools
are examples of such efforts (Posner & Rothbart, 2007a).
Acknouledgments-This research was suppofied bv NIMH
Crant HD56805 and bv a grant from the Dana Foundation for
studies of the arts. Further development of the theme ol' this
article is available in Posner and Rothbart (2007a).
REFERENCES
Ahacli, S. A., Rothbart, M. K., ct Ye. R. (1993). Children's
temperamentin the U.S.and China:Similaritiesand differences.
European Journal of PersonaLitl, 7, 359-378.
Badigaiyan,R., & Posner, M. I. (1997). Time course of cortical
activationsin implicit and erplicit recall. Journal of Neurost:i-
ence.17.4904491:1.
Beauregard,M., Levesque,J., & Bourgouin, P. (2001). Neural
correlatesof consciousself-r'egulationof emotion. Journal of
Neurosrience, 2l , 165.
Berger, A., Tzur, C., & Po,"ner,M. I. (2006). Infant brains derect
arithmetic errors. Proceedings of tlrc National Acudeml. of
Science,I 03, 12649-12653.
tslasi.G., Mattay,C. S., Bertolino,A., Elvevig, B., Callicott,J. H.,
Das,S. et al. (2005).Effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase val
l58 met genotypeon attentionalcontrol. Journal oJ-Neurosci-
ence,25,5038-5045.
Botwinick,M. M., Braver,T. S.,tsarch,D. M., Carter,C. S.,& Cohen.
J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoringand cognitivecontrol.Psycho-
logical Reaieu, I0B, 624452.
6 Volunr l-Nurnber l. Pages2 7
t 1 . , , , , \, , . t r r , , r L , , r r r , tl , , r r ,
l J L r s l r( ,i . . l . r r r r .l ' . . i ( l i , . r r , r l l I t , ' t r r l r i { r , l , r r i t i v e and erngtignal
i r r f l u t ' r r r : ri.rsr l l r c i r r r l l r r ' , rr r r r l , l l l l r . r l r l , . r . 7 i r , r i l s i n C o s n . i t i u e
S ,i e n , t , . / . 2 l ; : l ] : .
(lanli, T." Omura, K.. ll;r,r'. ll \\ ., I rrlllrrlr.r,
A., Todd, R.,
C o n s t a b l eR , . ' l ' . . c t l l . 1 ' r { X } r yl .L , t o r r l . r l l t . r , t i\ r , , 1 , . l i r gr c n e t i c
v a r i a t i o no f t h e s e r o l o r r i nl r . t u t s l x l l { ' tl r t x . n t r l l, r r . l i r r r l i o dn u r i n g
a cognitive attentiotr lrrsk. I'nn tcrlinS:, ,,1 lh,, .\'ttttt,ntrl lctulemy
of Science, 102, 12224-1222().
( l h a n g , F . , & B u r n s , B . M . ( 2 0 t ) 5 ) . A l t r . r r l r , r rr r r ; , r r . s , . l r , x r l t : r s :
A s s o c i a t i o n sw i t h e i ' f o r t f u l c o n t r o l u r u l r r r o t i r i r t i r r r r(.) l t i l t l ! ) e t r c l -
olnnent. 76. 24;-2b3.
C r o t t a z - H e r b e t t eS, . , & M e n o n , V . ( 2 0 0 6 ) . I [ ' l u : r r . i r r r , rl v l r r . rtrl r r . u r r t c r i o r
r : i n g u l a t ec o f t e r r n o d u l a t e sa t t e n t i o n a l r e s l x ) n s r . l:, M l l l : r r u l l l l i l ,
evidence. JountuL of Cognitiue Neuroscience.tll,7(l> itlll.
D e h a e n e , S . . P o s n e r . M . 1 . , & T u c k e r , D . M . ( . 1 9 9 4 ) .l , r x . ; r l i z ; r t i o rorf
a nerrral systern for enor detection antl t:onrpensaliot. I'sych.o-
logicul Science, ,i, 30:l-305.
D i a m o n d . A . , B r i a n d , L . , F o s s e l l a ,J . , & G e h l b a c h . 1 . .( 2 0 0 4 ) . O e n e r i c
and neurochemical moclulation of prefrorrtal cognitive functions
in children. Am,eriurrt .lotLrnul of Pslchiutr1., l6t , lh-r132.
f)uncan, J., Seitz, ll. J., Kolodnv. J., Bor. D., Herzog,H.. Ahmecl, A.,
et al. (2000). A neural basis for gener-al intelligence. Sr:jence.
289^ 4>i460.
Eisenberg,N., Smith, C. L." Sadovsky,A., & Spinrad, T'. L. (2004).
Effortful control: Relations with ernotion regulation, arljustment,
a n d s o c i a l i z a t i o n i n c h i l d h o o d . I n R . F . B a u r n e i s t e r& K . D .
Vohs (Eds.). Handbook oJ selJ'-regulation: Reseurt:h,rlrcory and
applications (pp.259-282\. New York: Guilford l)ress.
'f..
Etkin, A., Egner, Peraza, D. M., Kandel, E. R.. & Hirsch, J.
(2006). Resolving emotional conflict: A role for the rostral
anterior cingulate coflex in modulating activitl,- in the anrygdala.
Neuron.5/, B;l-882.
Fan, J.. Flombaum. J. I., McCandliss, B. D., l'homas, K. M., &
Posner, M. I. (2003). Cognitive and brain consequences of
conflict. Nettroimo.ge. 18. 42-57.
Fan, J., Fossella, J. A., Summer, T., & Posner, M. L (200:l). Mapping
the genetic variation of exet:utiveattention onto brain activity.
Proceedings of the National Academl of ScientesoJ'the (|nitcd
States of Amerir:a, 100, 7406-741I.
Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D.. Fossella,J., Flombaum, J. I., & posner. M. I.
(2005). The activation of attentional networks. Neuroimage, 26,
471479.
Fan. J.. Wu, Y., Fossella,J., & Posner,M. L (2001).Assessing the
heritabilit),of attentionalnetworks.BMC Neuroscience, 2, 14.
Gehring,W. J., Gross,8., Coles,M. G. fI.. Meyer,D. E., &- Donchin,Ii.
(1993). A neural svstenrfor error detectionand cornpensation.
PsychoLogical Scierc e,,1, 38;390.
Cerardi-Caulton,G. (2000). Sensitivitl. to spatial conflic,tand the
developnrent of self-regulationin children 2,1-36nurnthsof age.
Deuelopmentul Scie
nce,,l. 397404.
Conzalez,C., Fuentes,L. J., Can'anza,J. A.. & Estevez,A. I.'.(2001).
Temperamentand attention in the self-regulationof ?-year-old
children. Person uli4' arul I ndiuidual Dffirences,.10, 9Jl-916.
Holrovd.C. B., & Coles,M. G. H. (2002).The neuralbasisof hurnan
error prot'essing:Reinforcementlearning, dopamine and the
error related negativitv.PsychologicaL Reieu, I0g, 679-709.
Kagan,J., & For, N. (2006). Biolog.v,cukure, and temperamental
biases. In W. Darnon, R. Lerner, & N. llisenberg (Eds.),
HaruJbookof child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, dtul
 XIan K . R o t h b a r t . I l r a r l I ' 1 .S h e r : s r ' .a n t l \ { i c h a r l I . l ) o s n e r
p e r . s o n r t l i t vL L e r c l o p r n e n(t6 t h e t l . . p p . 1 6 7 - 2 2 5 ) . \ e w
\I'ilci.
K o c h a n s k a , G . ( 1 9 9 7 ) . N { u l t i p l e l r a t h w a v st o c o n s c i e n c e f b l c h i l d r e n
rvith rliflerent temperarlrents from todtllerhootl to age 5. Derel-
opntentol P svcholo gt, .1, 22,9-2.10.
Kochanska, (1.. Nlurrar. K. T.. & Harlan. E. T. (2000). Effortful
control in earlv chilrlhrxrt:l:Continuitv anrl change. antecedents,
and imlrlications for social tleveloprnent. DeuelopmentaL Psr-
.ht I og r . .3(," 220-232.
McCandliss, B.. Beck, I. L., Sandak. R., & Perfetti, C. (2003).
Focusing atlention on tlecoding for children with poor reading
skill: Design and prelirninan test of the word building inter-
veritiorr. *ientifc Studies of Rcudirtg, 7,75-104.
M u r i s . P . " & ( ) l l e n t l i c k . T . F I . ( 2 { n : r ) . T h e r o l e o f t e m p e r a m e n ti n t h e
etiologv of clrild psvchopalhology. CLinical Child und Famil.t'
Psrth ohtgr Rerieu,,B. 27 I -2i19.
O c h s n e r . K . N . , B u r r g e ,S . A . . G r o s s .J . J . . & C a b r i e l i , J . D . E . ( 2 0 0 2 ) .
Rethinking feelings: An l'NIRI stucly of the cognitive regulaliorr
of errxrtiorr.Jottrnol oJ Cognitite X'eurolcience,11, l2l5-I229.
P o s n e r , M . I . , & F a n , J . ( i n p r e s s ) . : \ t t e n t i o n a s a n o r g a n s v s t e n r .I n
J. Ponrerantz (lid.), Neuro6loLogr of perception and conmrunica-
tion: F-rorn s)napse to society.'fhe IVth l)e Lange Conference.
C a n r l r r i r l g e .U K : C a n r b r i d g e[ I n i v e r s i t v P r e s s .
Posrrer, M. L, & Rothbarr, M. K. (1998). Attention, self-regulation.
and consciousness. PAlloso1rhiral T'ronsactions of the Rotal
Socien oJ Inndon. B,.l1il.
l()1.rI927.
Pcrsncr.M. I.. & Rothbart, M. K. (201)7a).Educating the humon broin.
S r a s h i n g t o n ,D C : A P A B o o k s .
Posner. M. I.. & Rothbart, M. K. (200;b). Research on attentional
netrvorks as a model for the integration of psvcholoEJicalscience.
Annual Reuiew of Psychol.og-r.58. I-23.
P o s n e r . M . I . , R o t h b a r t , M . K . . & S h e e s e .B . E . ( 2 0 0 7 ) . A t t e n t i o n
genes. I)euelopmentaL Scie.nce,10. 21-29.
Putnanr. S. P., Rothbart, M. K.. & (lartstein, M. A (in press).
llomotypic ancl heterotypic <'ontinuitv of {inegrained tempera-
rnent during infancy, totldlerherod.and early childhood. fiy'ant
arul Ohiltl Deueloltme,nt.
Reuter, M.. Ott, U., Vaitl. D., & I{ennig, J. (2007). Impaired executive
contrerlassociated with a variation in the trl'ptophan hydroxvlase-
2 gene. Jou.rnal of Cognithn Neurost:ient:e,19, 4}l.40il.
R o t h b a n . M . K . ( i n p r e s s ) . T ' e m p e r a m e n t .d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p e r s o n -
alitv. Current Directions in P.sychoLogicaL
Science,.
Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi. S. A., Hershey. K. L., & Fisher, P. (2001).
'l'he
Irrvestigations of tenrperanrent art three to seven years:
clrildren's Lrehavior questiorrnaire. ChiLd Deuekryment, 72,
139.1*1408.
'femperament
Rothbat, Nl. K.. & Bates. J. E. (2006). in children's
development. In W. Darnon & R. l,erner (Book Eds.) &
N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Hondbook of'chikl psyt:hology: l'ol. 3.
Socio.l,ernotionaL.rurd personu.litt derelopment (6th ed., pp. S9-
166). New York: Wiley.
Rothbaft. M. K., & Dernberv, D. (I981). Development of individual
differences in temperament. In Nl. E. Larnb & A. L. Brown (Eds.),
Adrunce-s ln de,telopnrcntal psvchologl (Vol. I, pp. 37-86).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaurn.
Volume l-Number 1, Pages2-i
\-r,rk: llothlrarl" l\I. K.. Dern-bellr', [).. & Hershev. K. (2000). Stabilitv of
ternperanrent in childhood: Laboratory infant assessment to
parent repod at seven 1'ears. ln \'. J. Mollese & D. t,. Molfese
(Eds.)" Temperament ond personoli4 derelopntent acrossthe life
.?rln (pp. B5-f t9). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.
Ilothl,rart. N{. K.. Dern'bern. I).. & Posner, M. I. (1994). A
ps1'r'hobiological approach to the development of tem[)erament.
In J. E. Bates &' T. f). \\rar:hs (Eds.), Tempertunent:Indit:irluol
rlilJbreru,e.s
<tt the interface oJ'hiolog,t'ond behat,ior (pp. 83-l l6).
\l'ashington, D(l: American Psychological Associatiun.
ltothbart, l\1. K.. Ellis, L. K., Rueda. M. R.. & Posner, M. I. (200:l).
Developing mechanisnrs o{ effortful control. Journol oJ'Person-
u L i t l , 7l . I I l : l - l 1 . 1 : 1 .
Itothbart, l\'1.K., Posner. M. I.. &- Kieras, J. (2006). Temperanrent,
attention, trnd the develolrrnento{ self-regulation.[n K. McCartnev
& D. Phillips Eds.), Ifte Bku:kuell hq.rulbook of early dild detx:l-
opmcnt (pp.33&35?). Malclen. MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Rothban, M. K., & Rueda. M. R. (2005). The development of effortlul
t:ontrol. In U. N{avr, E. Arvh" tt S. W. Keele (Eds.), Det'ebping
irulit'iduuli4 in the humon hnrin,: A tribute to Michael I. Posner
(pp. 167*lBB). \l'ashington. DC: American Psyr:hological
Association.
Rothbart, M. K., & Sheese, ts. E. (2006). Temperament and emotion-
regulation. In J. Gross (F,t1.1.Handbook of enotion.-regulation
(pp. 331-350). New \-ork: Guilford Press.
Rueda. M. R., Fan. J., Halparin, J., ()ruber, D., Lercari, L. P..
Mt:Candliss, B. D., et al. (200.1). Development of attention
during t:hildho od. N europstt:lutlogitt. 42, 1029-1040.
Itueda, M. R., Posner, M. 1., &- Rothbaft. M. K. (2004). Attentional
control and self-regulation. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Yohs
(Eds.). Ilandbook ol self-regulation: Research, theon', und
applications (pp. 2B:i-1100). Neu, York: Cuiiford I'ress.
Rueda" M. R., Rothbart, M. K.. McCandliss. B. I)., Saccamanno,L., &
Posrrer.M. I. (2005). Training. nraturation and genetic inliuences
on the development of executive attention. Proceedings of the
National Academr of Sciencesof the LIS, , 102, 14931-149:\6.
Ru{1, H. A., & Rothban, NI. K. (I99O. ,lttention in earLy deaelopmtnt:
The.mesttnd utriutions. New York: Oxlirrd University Press.
Rumbaugh, D. M., & Washbunr, D. A. (1995). Attention and memory
in relation to leaming: r\ comparative adaptation percpective. In
C. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attenion, memnry ond exe-
cutiueJuru:tion (pp. 199-21 9). Baltirnore: Brookes.
Sheese, ts. E., Rothbart. M. K., & Posner, M.I. (2006, August),
Precursors of executite ottention urtd self-regulotjon. Svrnposium
presentation at the annual conlerence of the American Psvcho-
logical Association.New Orleans. LA.
Sheese, B. E., Voelker, P. M., Rothbart, M. K., & Posner, M. I.
(in press). Parenting qualitv interacts with genetic variation in
dopamine receptor DIID4 to inlluence temperament in early
childhood. Detelopment.and Psrchoputhologr.
v a n V e e n , V . , & C a r r e r ,C . S . ( 2 0 0 2 ) . T h e t i m i n g o f a c t i o n - m o n i t o r i n g
processes in the anterior cingulate cortex. Journol of Cognitiue
Neuroscience, 14, 59:1402.
Wvnn, K. (1992). Addition ancl subtraction b1'hurnan infants. Atature,
.358.749-750.