Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Entertainment Computing
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/entcom

Action video game players require greater EEG coupling between prefrontal T
cortices to adequately perform a dual task
Julio Llamas-Alonso, Miguel Angel Guevara, Marisela Hernández-González,
Jorge C. Hevia-Orozco1, Mayra L. Almanza-Sepúlveda2,
⁎

Instituto de Neurociencias, CUCBA, Universidad de Guadalajara, Francisco de Quevedo 180, Guadalajara, Jalisco 44130, Mexico

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Action video games require the ability to perform multiple complex activities concurrently, while dual-tasking
Working memory has been associated with functional changes in sub-regions of the prefrontal cortex, such as the frontopolar
Dual task (FPPC) and dorsolateral (DLPC) cortices. However, the degree of electroencephalographic synchronization or
EEG correlation correlation (rEEG) between these areas has not yet been examined. Thus, the aim of the present study was to
Frontopolar and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices
characterize rEEG of action video game players (AVGPs) and compare it to inexperienced video game players
(NVGPs) during performance of a dual working memory task. rEEG were recorded in AVGPs and NVGPs while
performing three distinct working memory tasks: (1) Corsi block-tapping task (CBTT); (2) N-back task; and (3)
dual task, which involved performing both CBTT and N-back tasks simultaneously. AVGPs achieved a higher
number of correct trials and greater memory span during the dual task than NVGPs, as well as an increased
intrahemispheric FPPC-DLPC rEEG, left (Fp1-F3) and right (Fp2-F4), in the beta1, beta2 and gamma bands, and
an increased interhemispheric rEEG FPPC (Fp1-Fp2) in all EEG bands. Our results suggest that AVGPs had higher
working memory skills as the level of task complex increased, and that they required higher FPPC-DLPC coupling
to adequately perform the dual task.

1. Introduction by performing plural tasks simultaneously [6]. Training in multitasking

Modern life requires performing multiple tasks on a daily basis, but
people’s ability to perform such tasks quickly and effectively is com-
promised when they attempt –or need– to do them simultaneously,
because this circumstance generates interference in cognitive processes
[1]. It has been proposed that the frontopolar (FPPC) and dorsolateral
prefrontal cortices (DLPC) are brain regions that participate in ob-
taining, manipulating and integrating information during performance
of simultaneous tasks that involve such cognitive processes as working
memory and attention [2]. Working memory and attention processes
have been assessed by dual paradigms that involve changes in attention
and memory [3,4]. Performing dual tasks reduces effectiveness and
speed (multitasking cost), but this reduction in cognitive processing is
not immutable; in fact, multitasking abilities decrease during the adult
lifespan [5]. However, prolonged training can considerably modify
prefrontal cortex activity and reduce possible contingencies generated
that involves video games has been shown to reduce multitasking costs
in older adults compared to younger controls [5], while also increasing
midline frontal theta activity and frontal–posterior theta coherence in
older adults; changes that have been associated with improvement in
cognitive abilities [5]. Playing action video games can improve several
cognitive processes, including perception, attention, memory abilities,
working memory and performing dual tasks [7–11]. Playing video
games demands that gamers perform multiple tasks simultaneously, so
training with such games can improve performance and reduce costs
during dual task execution [11,12]. In addition, several recent studies
indicate that the experience gained through constant practice with
video games could lead to plastic changes in the brain [5,13,14].
Gong et al. [15] used fMRI to show that AVGPs attained better re-
sults on memory and attention tasks, and their findings were related to
neuroplasticity and changes in the functional connectivity between
prefrontal areas, like the DLPC, in association with memory and

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour (PNB), McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S
4K1, Canada.
E-mail addresses: Almanzam@mcmaster.ca, Almanza.sepulveda@gmial.com (M.L. Almanza-Sepúlveda).
1
Present addresses: Instituto de Neurobiología, UNAM, campus Juriquilla, Boulevard Juriquilla, Querétaro 76230, Mexico.
2
Present addresses: Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour (PNB) McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1,
Canada.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2019.100302
Received 22 April 2018; Received in revised form 5 February 2019; Accepted 17 April 2019
Available online 22 April 2019
1875-9521/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al. Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302

attention processes [15]. In an earlier study, Kühn et al. [13] demon- Table 1
strated that prolonged video game training increased gray matter in the Mean ± 2 standard errors (SE) for scores on the inclusion criteria that defined
right DLPC and fostered the formation of the right hippocampal and the characteristics of participants in the AVGP and NVGP groups.
bilateral cerebellum, compared to a non-trained control. Another study AVGPs NVGPs
examined the neural correlates of selective attention in AVGPs using
magnetic resonance to demonstrate that after performing increasingly- Mean SE Mean SE
complex attention tasks, NVGPs showed greater recruitment in the
Sub-test
fronto-parietal network than AVGPs in each instance [16,17]. The Age 23.16 ± 1.62 24.88 ± 2.49
fronto-parietal network has been associated mainly with selective at- WAIS IQ 105.27 ± 7.17 104.05 ± 8.65
tention, consciousness, working memory and chunking cognitive pro- Visual search 10.55 ± 2.77 10.33 ± 2.52
Digit detection 11.5 ± 1.15 11.66 ± 0.97
cesses. Taken together, these studies provide evidence of the im-
Successive series 9.05 ± 2.62 10.55 ± 2.87
portance of action video game experience in relation to changes in Digits forward span 10.66 ± 2.83 9.83 ± 2.81
brain functionality. However, it is important to determine the degree of
functional EEG coupling between dorsolateral and frontopolar areas
while AVGPs perform a dual task with high cognitive demand, since a
certain degree of difference between the EEG coupling of these pre- Ops I, II, III; Unreal Tournament; Halo 4, 5; Titanfall; Team Fortress 2; and
frontal cortices may be associated with functional differences between Battlefield 1, among others. Action video games are set in completely
these brain structures. 3D-environments where players experience gameplay through the
Electroencephalographic activity (EEG) is a non-invasive technique perspective of the main character in a first or third-person view. They
for measuring electrical brain functionality because it simultaneously require constant information updating because players must perform
records the various brain EEG bands that are engaged during certain multiple tasks concurrently.
cognitive operations and physiological states. For example, the delta Following Boot et al. [39], to be classified as AVGPs participants
band is typically associated with attention by inhibiting interferences had to meet the following criteria: having played action video games for
during performance of cognitive tasks [18–21], while theta has been at least 7 h per week during a minimum period of one year on multiple
related to encoding during memory processes [1,22–25]. Of the fast platforms (PC, XBox, PlayStation, Nintendo). All participants who re-
frequencies, the alpha bands (1 and 2) have been associated with ported having little or no experience in video game practice were
alertness and information processing [26–28], whereas the beta (1 and classified as non-gamers (NVGPs). Potential participants who were
2) and gamma bands are involved in wakefulness [29] and activities found not to meet the inclusion criteria as AVGP or NVGP were ex-
that demand consciousness and perception [29]. Finally, the gamma cluded.
band is also closely related to both the perception and maintenance of All subjects were right-handed and had no prior history of neuro-
information, which means retaining a specific stimulus during a delay logical or psychiatric disorders, learning disabilities, drug abuse or
period [30], reflecting its crucial role in working memory. chronic illness. An additional inclusion criterion was obtaining a CI
The coupling between two EEG frequency bands can be measured score above 80 as measured by the abbreviated Wechsler Adults
through electroencephalographic correlation (rEEG) and be used to Intelligence Scale WAIS-III [40]. We also used NEUROPSI tests to
identify possible functional relations across different brain regions [31]. evaluate previous attention and memory skills [41], as shown in
This correlation method has been used, for example, to determine Table 1.
whether the functional connectivity between brain regions changes in Participants were recruited through targeted announcements that
relation to different emotional and cognitive states [32,33]. Therefore, offered basic information about the study. These posts were accessible
the aim of the present study was to characterize the rEEG of the FPPC online through websites specializing in video games, at the University
and DLPC in AVGPs while performing a dual task. Consistent with the of Guadalajara and social media such as Facebook and Twitter. Once a
literature, we hypothesized that the functional interactions between potential participant met the inclusion criteria, the general procedures
these cortices will be higher in AVGP, and that this interaction will be were explained in an interview and he was invited to visit the in-
associated with better performance on a dual working memory task stallations of the Neuroscience Institute of the University of
when compared to the results of a group of NVGPs. Guadalajara for a single test session. Each subject signed a letter of
informed consent before participating. No participant had taken any of
2. Materials and methods the tests used in this study previously. All procedures performed in this
study were evaluated and accepted by the Ethics Committee of the
2.1. Participants Neuroscience Institute according to the ethical standards described in
the 1964 Helsinki Declaration.
Forty-one young male adults (aged 21–30) were recruited as part of
the study. Five were withdrawn from the study because they had sev- 2.2. Procedure
eral artifacts in the EEG signal. The remaining 36 participants were
divided into two groups: 18 action video game players (AVGPs), and 18 Participants were seated in front of a computer at an approximate
individuals with little or no video game experience (NVGPs). The age distance of 40 cm from the screen. All tasks were performed on a
range reflects the normal stages of the development of executive computer with an Intel processor that features Windows 7 and a touch-
functions and prefrontal maturation [34–36]. We selected a male sensitive, 13-inch monitor, during one single EEG recording session.
sample because previous studies have reported that females play less Both groups performed the following tasks: N-back, Corsi block-tapping
frequently and show less interest in social playing interactions than (CBTT) –in counterbalanced order– and, finally, both tasks simulta-
males [37,38] and, especially, since men play more action videogames neously (dual task). Electrophysiological activity was recorded during
than women [37]. Potential participants first answered a pre-selection four conditions:
questionnaire on their experience with video games to measure their
knowledge about action video game genres. Their responses were used 1. Baseline
to classify them as AVGPs, NVGPs or “neither”, these last were not 2. CBTT
consider part of the study. Participants classified as AVGPs reported 3. N-back
playing the following action games more frequently: Call of Duty: Black 4. Dual task

2
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al.
2.3. Tasks
2.3.1. Corsi block-tapping task
A computerized version of the CBTT (CubmemPC.exe) was used
[42], in which 10 blue cubes are shown on a computer screen against a
rectangular gray background. The task began when the participant
touched the computer screen (touchscreen) to automatically initiate a
sequence of changes in some of the cubes. Subjects then had to emulate
the sequence of cubes generated by the program, which changed the
color of each cube tapped from blue-to-yellow (1-second duration) in-
dividually and sequentially to form a series of bins, whose length in-
creased progressively up to a span of 7 cubes (4 trials for each length).
Immediately after the last cube of the sequence was illuminated, the
participant had to reproduce the sequence presented by touching the
cubes on the screen, but in reverse order. The total number of trials was
24. The following parameters were measured: reaction time (RT), total
execution time (TET), number of correct trials (CT), and the longest
span retained in memory (S).
2.3.2. N-back
A computerized version of the visuospatial N-back task was used. In
this task, a sequence of stimuli is presented one-at-a-time, and each
participant had to compare the present stimulus to the one presented
immediately before in the sequence, and indicate whether the first one
matched the current sequence. A blue square was used as the stimulus
in every trial. Each stimulus appeared randomly for 2000 ms in one of 9
possible slots arranged like the traditional tic-tac-toe game. For this
task, we used only 1-back (one memory span). The total number of
trials was 49, and the following parameters were measured: reaction
time (RT), total execution time (TET), and number of correct trials (CT).
2.3.3. Dual task
Once both groups had performed the CBTT and N-back conditions
individually (including an initial 5-trial practice session to become fa-
miliar with the performance of both tasks), participants performed the
CBTT and N-back tasks simultaneously, In this paradigm, two in-
dependent sequences of each task were presented one-by-one. The task
was carried out in 4 phases. In the first phase, an N-back stimulus ap-
peared on the screen as described in the previous paragraph. At that
point, participants only had to remember the location of the blue
square. In the second phase, the first sequence of the CBTT was shown
and participants only had to watch and memorize the sequence pre-
sented. Here, both groups had to maintain on-line the position of both
stimuli (i.e., the position of the blue square and CBTT sequence). In the
third phase, a second N-back stimulus appeared in the screen and
participants had to indicate whether the previous N-back stimulus seen
in the first phase matched the current one, while maintaining on-line
the CBTT sequence. In the final phase, they had to replicate the CBTT
sequence they had seen in the second phase. Together, these four
phases formed one trial. Both stimuli were always presented in the same
order (N-back and CBBT sequence) until a total of 24 trials was com-
pleted. It is important to clarify that the CBTT task gradually increased
the complexity of the sequences, beginning with 4 sequences of 2 blocks
each (span 2), then 4 sequences of 3 blocks each (span 3), and so on
until 7 blocks were shown (span 7). The N-back stimulus was always 1-
back.
2.4. EEG procedure and recordings
Electrodes were placed according to the 10–20 system [43]. Cor-
relation analyses were performed at the following derivations: Fp1-Fp2,
considering FPPC areas, and F3-F4, considering DLPC. The degree of
correlation between these brain areas was calculated in the time do-
main for the seven frequency bands (slow bands [delta (δ, 1.5–3.5 Hz)
and theta (θ, 3.5–7.5 Hz)] and fast bands [alpha1 (α1, 7.5–10.5 Hz),
alpha2 (α2, 10.5–13.5 Hz), beta1 (β1, 13.5–19.5 Hz), beta2 (β2,
3
Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302
19.5–30 Hz), and gamma (31–50 Hz)]) by means of Pearson product-
moment correlation coefficients between successive amplitude values
of EEG segments from the derivations analyzed. To approximate a
normal distribution, correlation values were converted to Fisher’s Z
scores before performing statistical analysis. All EEG signals were ex-
amined to detect epochs saturated by muscle motion, ocular movement
or heart noise. Signals identified with some type of noise or artifact
were automatically detected using a computer program designed in our
laboratory called CHECASEN [44]. After filtering, the EEG measure-
ments were decreased to 60 EEG epochs (2 s one-by-one), using the
EEGmagic PC program [45]. EEG recording was carried out during four
conditions: (1) baseline, at rest for 3 min before performing the task; (2
& 3) while performing the counterbalanced CBTT and N-back tasks for
7 min; and (4) the dual task condition. There was a two-minute interval
between conditions. Each EEG recording was made in a single session
that lasted approximately one hour and took place in a shielded,
soundproofed room. During EEG recording, subjects were awake and
seated in a comfortable chair. Ears were used as a reference point for all
derivations with a ground electrode linked to an electrode placed on the
forehead. The reference electrode and volume conduction were placed
following a similar procedure suggested by Nunez et al. [46] in order to
obtain better scalp correlations. A Grass model P7 polygraph was used
to amplify the EEG recordings; filters were established from 1 to 50 Hz.
Impedance was kept below 10 kOhms for all electrodes. The sample rate
was set at 512 Hz. Once saved, all EEG data were processed and ana-
lyzed offline. To avoid noise generated by eye movement, an electro-
oculogram was also performed.
2.5. Statistical analyses
2.5.1. Behavioral analyses
The behavioral parameters –RT, TET– were analyzed using
Student’s t-tests for independent groups (one test for each parameter),
while the parameters S and CT were assessed by a Mann Whitney U test
for all behavioral tasks, and for dependent groups comparisons a
Wilcoxon signed rank test was used.
2.5.2. EEG analyses
All EEG analyses were based on the 3 min for the baseline condition,
2 min for the N-back condition, 5 min for the CBTT condition, and
10 min for the dual condition. The EEG signals were analyzed offline to
eliminate saturated or artifact-contaminated epochs. Fast Fourier
Transform analyses were then applied to the artifact-free data in 2-s
epoch samples, with the spectral graph ranging from 0.5 to 30 Hz at
0.5 Hz-resolution. 60 filtered artifact-free EEG epochs (2 s each) were
taken as representative of each condition. Previous studies have shown
that 10 epochs (2 s each) of EEG signal are sufficient to provide sta-
tistical support for both absolute power and EEG correlation [47,48]. A
two-way ANOVA analysis of variance [2 action video game player
groups (AVGP/NVGP) in 4 conditions (baseline/N-back/CBTT/dual)]
was applied to the rEEG values of each EEG band and every derivation.
Specifically, an analysis of variance was applied to the rEEG measure-
ments (Fp1, Fp2, F3 and F4) for each band, followed by a Tukey 5% test
for post-hoc analysis. Significant differences were set at p ≤ 0.01 or
p ≤ 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Behavioral results
3.1.1. N-back
No significant between-group differences (p ≤ 0.05) were found for
any of the parameters evaluated during performance of this task.
3.1.2. CBTT
AVGPs showed a higher number of correct trials –U = 81.00– than
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al. Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302

Fig. 1. Box and whisker plot of the median of correct trials (max, 24), showing
that the performance of the AVGPs during execution of the Corsi block-tapping
task was significantly higher than that of NVGPs. Mann-Whitney U test,
p < 0.05.

NVGPs (p (u) = 0.027; see Fig. 1). No significant differences were found
for the other behavioral parameters evaluated (TET, S, RT).

3.1.3. Dual task

On the N-back dual task the two groups had similar performance, as
no significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) were found for any of the para-
meters evaluated in the between-groups comparison. However, on the
CBTT dual task, differences in CT (U = 99.50; p (u) = 0.05; see Fig. 2A)
and Span (U = 100.0; p (u) = 0.03) were found (see Fig. 2B) in the
AVGPs. No significant between-group differences were found for TET or
RT.
In the comparison between same groups for different conditions
(CBBT vs CBBT dual), A Wilcoxon Signed-Rank indicated that for the
NVGPs the median of correct trials during the CBTT task, Mdn = 19,
was statistically significantly higher than the median of correct trials Fig. 2. Box and whisker plots of the median of: (A) correct trials (max. 24),
during the dual CBTT task, Mdn = 13. Z = -3.36, p < 0.001; and for showing that the performance of the AVGPs during execution of the Corsi block-
the AVGPs the median of correct trials during the CBTT task, Mdn = 20, tapping task was significantly higher than that of the NVGPs; and (B) span
was statistically significantly higher than the median of correct trials (max. 7), showing that the AVGPs span on the Corsi block-tapping dual task was
during the dual CBTT task, Mdn = 16. Z = -3.73, p < 0.001. These significantly higher than that of the NVGPs. ° and * indicate atypical values.
results indicate that dual task was significantly more demanding for Mann-Whitney U test, ps < 0.05.
both groups (see Fig. 3).

3.2. EEG correlation data

3.2.1. Interhemispheric frontopolar correlation (Fp1-Fp2)

No between-group differences were found in the baseline condition
(see Fig. 4A), but during N-back the AVGPs showed a higher rEEG in the
alpha2 (F(1, 34) = 2.13; p < 0.04), beta1 (F(1, 34) = 2.59; p < 0.01),
beta2 (F(1, 34) = 2.75; p < 0.001), and gamma bands (F(1,
34) = 2.86; p < 0.001), compared to the NVGPs (see Fig. 4B). Simi-
larly, during CBTT, the AVGPs had a higher rEEG in the alpha2 (F(1,
34) = 2.25; p < 0.03), beta1 (F(1, 34) = 2.12; p < 0.04), beta2 (F(1,
34) = 2.44; p < 0.02), and gamma bands (F(1, 34) = 2.37; p < 0.02),
compared to the NVGPs (see Fig. 4C). Finally, during the dual task
condition, the AVGPs showed a higher rEEG in all bands recorded, as
follows: delta (F(1, 34) = 2.66; p < 0.03), theta (F(1, 34) = 2.54;
p < 0.01), alpha1 (F(1, 34) = 2.29; p < 0.02), alpha2 (F(1,
34) = 2.78; p < 0.001), beta1 (F(1, 34) = 2.87; p < 0.001), beta2 (F
(1, 34) = 2.96; p < 0.001), and gamma (F(1, 34) = 3.01; p < 0.001),
compared to the NVGPs (see Fig. 4D). Fig. 3. Box and whisker plots of the median of correct trials (max. 24). In the
comparison between same groups for different conditions (CBBT vs. CBBT
3.2.2. Left intrahemispheric frontopolar-dorsolateral correlation (Fp1-F3) dual), showing that dual CBTT was significantly more demanding for both
No differences were found between the two groups at baseline (see groups. ° indicates atypical values. Wilcoxon test, ps < 0.001.

4
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al. Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302

Fig. 4. Mean ± standard errors of the interhemispheric correlation (z values) of the different EEG frequency bands recorded in the FPPC (Fp1-Fp2) of the AVGP and
NVGP groups during the following conditions: (A) baseline; (B) N-back; (C) CBTT; and, (D) dual. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s 5% tests. * p < 0.05 as compared to
NVGPs.

Fig. 5A). During performance of the N-back task, in contrast, the AVGPs
showed higher left FPPC-DLPC intrahemispheric rEEG (Fp1-F3), though
only in the gamma band (F(1, 34) = 2.45; p < 0.02), compared to the
NVGP group (see Fig. 5B). No between-group differences were found in
the CBTT condition (see Fig. 5C), but in the dual condition the AVGPs
had higher rEEG in the beta2 (F(1, 34) = 2.30, p < 0.02) and gamma
(F(1, 34) = 2.44; p < 0.02), bands compared to the NVGPs (see
Fig. 5D).
3.2.3. Right intrahemispheric frontopolar-dorsolateral prefrontal correlation
(Fp2-F4)
No differences were found at baseline between the two groups (see
Fig. 6A), but during performance of the N-back task the AVGPs showed
a higher right intrahemispheric FPPC-DLPC rEEG (Fp1-F3) in the beta1
(F(1, 34) = 3.64; p < 0.001), beta2 (F(1, 34) = 3.16; p < 0.001), and
gamma bands (F(1, 34) = 3.29; p < 0.001) than the NVGPs (see
Fig. 6B). During CBTT, no differences in the right intrahemispheric

Fig. 5. Mean ± standard errors of the left intrahemispheric correlation (z values) of the different EEG frequency bands recorded in FPPC and DLPC (Fp1-F3) of the
AVGP and NVGP groups during the following conditions: (A) baseline; (B) N-back; (C) CBTT; and, (D) dual. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s 5% tests. * p < 0.05 as
compared to NVGPs.

5
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al.
Fig. 6. Mean ± standard errors of the right intrahemispheric correlation (z values) of the different EEG frequency bands recorded in the FPPC and DLPC (Fp2-F4) of
the AVGP and NVGP groups during the following conditions: (A) baseline; (B) N-back; (C) CBTT; and, (D) dual. ANOVA followed by Tukey’s 5% tests. * p < 0.05 as
compared to NVGPs.
FPPC-DLPC rEEG were found (see Fig. 6C), but in the dual condition,
the AVGPs had a higher rEEG in the beta1 (F(1, 34) = 2.56; p < 0.01),
beta2 (F(1, 34) = 2.80; p < 0.001), and gamma bands (F(1,
34) = 3.07; p < 0.001) than the NVGPs (see Fig. 6D).
4. Discussion
This study examined the rEEG between prefrontal areas during
performance of dual tasks in AVGPs and NVGPs. Behavioral results
showed that these groups had similar performance during simple test
conditions, as they achieved virtually identical scores on all the para-
meters evaluated on the N-back task. During the simple CBTT task,
AVGP had a higher number of correct trials, but did not show a longer
memory span than NVGP. These results suggest that while simple tasks
involve working memory processes, these do not demand a large ex-
ecutive effort by healthy young men. Likewise, in the dual condition,
the two groups had similar results during the N-back task, but the CBTT
dual condition proved to be more demanding for both groups. The
AVGPs had a higher number of correct trials and a longer memory span
than the NVGPs, which could suggest that the N-back dual condition
acted more as interference (a distractor) than as a working memory task
per se, due to the low demand that it required while both groups re-
sponded to the CBTT dual condition. It appears, then, that the AVGPs
outperformed the NVGPs on the more complex task. These results
concur with those reported in a study by Colzato et al. [7], which
showed that AVGPs and NVGPs obtained similar results on simple
cognitive tasks, but that the former became more accurate and could
retain a higher span of items in memory as task complexity increased
during a dual condition.
The fact that expert and beginner players achieved almost perfect
scores on the N-back task during both conditions (simple and dual),
suggests that the N-back task using 1-back is not an effective parameter
for evaluating differences in working memory between healthy people,
probably because it was too easy for all participants and, therefore,
produced a ceiling effect. This finding has been reported in other stu-
dies which used a minimum memory load that did not cause subjects
6
Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302
greater difficulty [39,49]. Recent studies suggest that the N-back
paradigm is not a suitable test for studying individual differences in
working memory because its implementation involves primarily other
complex cognitive processes, such as inhibition and inter-stimulus at-
tentional control (management interference) [50]. This approach is
consistent with the load theory of selective attention and cognitive
control [51], which sustains that performance of the N-back task also
depends on resources that go beyond the typical cognitive processes of
working memory and may include retention, manipulation and in-
formation retrieval [50]. It has been proposed that conflicting processes
exist between familiarity with, and memory of, a stimulus; for example,
if the current stimulus matches the one immediately prior, but not the
one that was shown N number of previous stimuli back, which had to be
maintained in memory [52]. This result supports the theory that AVGPs
perform better as difficulty increases [7]. Contrary to the results of the
N-back in CBTT task, the AVGPs showed better working memory and
dual-task skills than the NVGPs. They also displayed a higher memory
span, which may be associated with greater attentional control and
working memory capacity that could, in turn, be related to their ample
experience with action video games.
It is important to mention that while no between-group differences
on the individual or dual N-back tasks were found at the behavioral
level, clear differences in the rEEG were detected, suggesting differ-
ences in brain functionality between our AVGPs and NVGPs. This is
consistent with previous studies, which have shown that video game
training can generate significant neural changes in inexperienced
people [13].This raises the possibility that gaming experience may
improve the effectiveness of certain cognitive processes, such as at-
tention and stimuli-inhibition [7]. Although these differences were not
perceivable behaviorally in the simple conditions established in the
present study due to the simplicity of the tasks, they were clearly evi-
dent electrophysiologically, as the AVGPs and NVGPs manifested dis-
tinct patterns of neural synchronization. The behavioral results of this
study show that AVGPs have a higher capacity for working memory
tasks than NVGPs. Moreover, these findings are consistent with EEG
results. Future studies of this kind should intensify the memory load in
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al.
order to increase task difficulty. However, when the EEG results com-
pared interhemispheric rEEG in FPPC areas Fp1-Fp2, the AVGPs
showed higher coupling in the N-back and CBTT conditions in the
alpha2, beta1, beta2, and gamma bands. In general, they showed higher
functional coupling between FPPC regions, mainly in the fast EEG
bands during the simple conditions. In addition, in the dual condition,
the same interhemispheric comparison showed that the AVGPs had
higher rEEG in all bands recorded, while in the left intrahemispheric
FPPC-DLPC comparison for Fp1-F3, the AVGPs showed higher rEEG in
the gamma band during the N-back condition, and higher coupling in
the beta2 and gamma bands during the dual condition. Finally, in the
right intrahemispheric FPPC-DLPC comparison for Fp2-F4, the AVGPs
showed higher rEEG in the same bands –beta1, beta2, and gamma–
during the N-back and dual conditions.
When added to the behavioral results, the higher EEG correlation in
FPPC regions (in practically all fast bands) shown by the AVGPs during
the dual condition suggests that those subjects required greater inter-
hemispheric coupling among FPPC areas to perform the dual task
adequately.
In this study, the AVGPs showed higher FPPC interhemispheric
rEEG (Fp1-Fp2) than the NVGPs in the fast bands (alpha2, beta1, beta2,
gamma) during the simple N-back and CBTT conditions. Other studies
have shown that increases in both alpha bands may reflect lower
arousal and less dedication to the task due to a decrease in information
processing [53]. It has also been suggested that video game training
might temporarily magnify an increase in alpha power, which means
that, in general, the alpha band could also be associated with attention
switching [54]. Thus, the higher rEEG in this band might suggest that
the AVGPs required fewer attentional resources and less cognitive
processing to perform a simple task adequately.
The beta bands, meanwhile, have been related to active thinking,
active attention and concrete problem-solving [55]. A previous study
using a cat model showed that beta frequencies might work as a support
for attentional activation in the visual system of that species [56]. When
arousal increases in humans, it is manifested by faster responses to
target visual stimuli, but an association with higher EEG activation in
the beta bands have also been reported [57]. Similarly, the gamma
band has been linked to working memory processing, specifically in
relation to memory load [58]. Activation of the gamma band in pre-
frontal and parietal regions has been shown to be involved in visual
information processing on some visuospatial cognitive tasks, such as
mental rotation and stimuli discrimination in amateur and expert mu-
sicians [59]. Therefore, the higher correlation in these fast bands in
AVGPs could be related to FPPC functional interhemispheric synchro-
nization during cognitive attentional and working memory information
processing while performing a dual task.
It has been proposed that one function of working memory is to
maintain the distinction between relevant and irrelevant stimuli on
tasks that are selected for attention. Electrophysiological studies have
found that neurons in prefrontal regions (associated with working
memory processing) are actively selected in accordance with relevant
stimuli [60,61]. In the dual condition, our AVGPs showed a higher
correlation in the same derivations (Fp1-Fp2) in all bands recorded; i.e.,
delta, theta, alpha1, alpha2, beta1, beta2, and gamma. Functions re-
lated to the cognitive control of working memory and coordination
during a dual task have typically been associated with these same re-
gions (DLPF and PFC) [62]. In addition, neuroimaging studies of
healthy young people have reported the mutual participation of DLPC
and FPPC regions during performance of visuospatial and working
memory tasks [63]. These findings are consistent with the results of the
present study, since higher rEEG in DLPC and FPPC were found.
With respect to these results, studies of rifle-shooters during a
shooting session have reported lower EEG coherence values in inter-
hemispheric prefrontal regions (F3-F4) in the fast bands relative to
inexperienced shooters [64]. Those authors suggest that a kind of brain
economy exists in experts that can be understood as a decrement in
7
Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302
non-required cortico-cortical connection during task performance that
is acquired through experience. Our study, however, found higher
prefrontal EEG interhemispheric correlations. Unlike the work of Deeny
et al. [64], our experiment involved a dual task with high working
memory load. Tasks involving high cognitive demand have been linked
to the involvement of DLPC and FPPC regions [65]; therefore, these
rEEG results, together with our behavioral findings, allow us to suggest
that experts require higher FPPC interhemispheric coupling during
execution of a dual task with high memory load. This greater functional
synchronization between prefrontal areas could lead to better perfor-
mance on visuospatial tasks with high cognitive demand.
Our AVGPs also showed higher left and right intrahemispheric
correlations in FPPC-DLPC regions (Fp1-Fp2 and F3-F4) in the fast
bands –beta1 (14–19.5 Hz), beta2 (20–30 Hz), and gamma (31–50 Hz)–
during both the individual and dual N-back conditions, relative to
NVGPs. These results show greater synchronization between prefrontal
regions in the AVGPs during performance of a visuospatial dual task. It
has been suggested that greater specialization of these neural circuits is
associated with maturation, since these prefrontal structures play fun-
damental roles in learning [66]. We know that maturation correlates
with behavioral aspects, because children have poorer performance
than adults on many cognitive measures due to the immaturity of their
prefrontal neural regions [66]. The different brain functions observed
between the two groups in the present study might, therefore, suggest
greater hemispheric synchronization in the AVGPs, understood as a
closer communication between prefrontal regions that could be attrib-
uted to the experience of playing action video games. Several studies
have shown a relationship between working memory and dual co-
ordination in the control of selective visual attention, since there is
evidence to suggest that both coordinating a dual task and the active
maintenance of working memory involve similar regions in the DLPC
[67,68]. Bavelier et al. [16] evaluated attentional capacities between
AVGPs and NVGPs. They found that prefrontal-parietal pathways are
less activated in AVGPs, and that the higher activation in this circuit
could be explained by the greater attentional demand that the task
required. These authors suggest that the allocation of top-down atten-
tion indicates that AVGPs can assign attentional resources more
automatically (i.e., they performed the tasks with greater ex-
pertise—meaning faster and with less effort, thinking and conscious
mindfulness). These outcomes may suggest that AVGPs can filter irre-
levant information more efficiently, and that this may be reflected in
enhanced performance and concentration during a main task that re-
quires using prefrontal circuits.
5. Conclusion
By means of EEG correlation analysis, this study demonstrated rEEG
differences between action video game expert and amateur players
during a working memory dual task. Behaviorally, it found that AVGPs
showed better performance than NVGPs as task complexity increased.
Also, AVGPs have higher inter- and intrahemispheric coupling in DLPC
and FPPC areas that could be associated with working memory, dual
skills and attentional capacities. These findings could also be associated
with greater efficiency and better cognitive control capacities, given
that the AVGPs could actively maintain a larger amount of information
during two simultaneous working memory tasks.
The study is, of course, not without its limitations. Because it was
conducted with an all-male sample it is important to be cautious and
not generalize the results to a whole population. Future studies should
compare gender differences, both behavioral and physiologically, in
order to determine whether these results can be replicated in a popu-
lation of women who play video games. Also, it is necessary to continue
research with subjects who have ample experience in different video
game genres –generated through training or practice– and relate this to
neural functioning and the improvement of cognitive processes using
the simultaneous neuroimaging techniques that allow researchers to
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al.
obtain more accurate findings related to dual tasks and the memory
system. Despite these limitations, this study provides the first indica-
tions that in male players, experience in action video games modifies
EEG correlation patterns during performance of a dual task.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2019.100302.
References
[1] P. Herath, T. Klingberg, J. Young, K. Amunts, P. Roland, Neural correlates of dual
task interference can be dissociated from those of divided attention: an fMRI study,
Cereb. Cortex. 11 (2001) 796–805, https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/11.9.796.
[2] C. Kim, J.K. Kroger, V.D. Calhoun, V.P. Clark, The role of the frontopolar cortex in
manipulation of integrated information in working memory, Neurosci. Lett. 595
(2015) 25–29, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2015.03.044.
[3] R. Ellenbogen, N. Meiran, Working memory involvement in dual-task performance:
evidence from the backward compatibility effect, Mem. Cogn. 36 (2008) 968–978,
https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.5.968.
[4] S. Watter, G.M. Geffen, L.B. Geffen, The n-back as a dual-task: P300 morphology
under divided attention, Psychophysiology 38 (2001) 998–1003, https://doi.org/
10.1111/1469-8986.3860998.
[5] J.A. Anguera, J. Boccanfuso, J.L. Rintoul, O. Al-Hashimi, F. Faraji, J. Janowich,
E. Kong, Y. Larraburo, C. Rolle, E. Johnston, A. Gazzaley, Video game training
enhances cognitive control in older adults, Nature 501 (2013) 97–101, https://doi.
org/10.1038/nature12486.
[6] P.E. Dux, M.N. Tombu, S. Harrison, B.P. Rogers, F. Tong, R. Marois, Training im-
proves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing
in human prefrontal cortex, Neuron 63 (2009) 127–138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
neuron.2009.06.005.
[7] L. Colzato, W.P.M. van den Wildenberg, S. Zmigrod, B. Hommel, Action video
gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with
improvement in working memory but not action inhibition, Psychol. Res. 77 (2013)
234–239, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0415-2.
[8] C.S. Green, D. Bavelier, Effect of action video games on the spatial distribution of
visuospatial attention, J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32 (2006)
1465–1478, https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.6.1465.
[9] C.S. Green, D. Bavelier, Action video game training for cognitive enhancement,
Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 4 (2015) 103–108, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.
04.012.
[10] C.S. Green, D. Bavelier, Action video game modifies visual selective attention,
Nature 423 (2003) 534–537, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01647.
[11] T. Strobach, P.A. Frensch, T. Schubert, Video game practice optimizes executive
control skills in dual-task and task switching situations, Acta Psychol. (Amst) 140
(2012) 13–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.001.
[12] D. Chiappe, M. Conger, J. Liao, J.L. Caldwell, K.L. Vu, Improving multi-tasking
ability through action videogames, Appl. Ergon. 44 (2013) 278–284, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.08.002.
[13] S. Kühn, T. Gleich, R.C. Lorenz, U. Lindenberger, J. Gallinat, Playing super mario
induces structural brain plasticity: gray matter changes resulting from training with
a commercial video game, Mol. Psychiatry. 19 (2014) 265–271, https://doi.org/10.
1038/mp.2013.120.
[14] S. Wu, I. Spence, Playing shooter and driving videogames improves top-down
guidance in visual search, Attention, Percept. Psychophys. 75 (2013) 673–686,
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0440-2.
[15] D. Gong, H. He, W. Ma, D. Liu, M. Huang, L. Dong, J. Gong, J. Li, C. Luo, D. Yao,
Functional integration between salience and central executive networks: a role for
action video game experience, Neural Plast. (2016), https://doi.org/10.1155/
2016/9803165.
[16] D. Bavelier, R. Achtman, M. Mani, J. Föcker, Neural bases of selective attention in
action video game players, Vision Res. 61 (2012) 132–143, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.visres.2011.08.007.Neural.
[17] D. Bor, A. Seth, Consciousness and the prefrontal parietal network: insights from
attention, working memory, and chunking, Front. Psychol. 3 (2012) 63 https://
www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00063.
[18] T. Fernández, T. Harmony, M. Rodrlguez, J. Bernal, J. Silva, A. Reyes, E. Marosi,
EEG activation patterns during the performance of tasks involving different com-
ponents of mental calculation, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 94 (1995)
175–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(94)00262-J.
[19] T. Harmony, The functional significance of delta oscillations in cognitive proces-
sing, Front. Integr. Neurosci. 7 (2013) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2013.
00083.
[20] T. Harmony, T. Fernández, J. Silva, J. Bernal, L. Díaz-Comas, A. Reyes, E. Marosi,
M. Rodríguez, M. Rodríguez, EEG delta activity: an indicator of attention to internal
processing during performance of mental tasks, Int. J. Psychophysiol. 24 (1996)
8
Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302
161–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(96)00053-0.
[21] W. Vogel, D.M. Broverman, E.L. Klaiber, EEG and mental abilities,
Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2 (1968) 166–175, https://doi.org/10.
1016/0013-4694(68)90122-3.
[22] W. Klimesch, M. Doppelmayr, W. Stadler, D. Pöllhuber, P. Sauseng, D. Röhm,
Episodic retrieval is reflected by a process specific increase in human electro-
encephalographic theta activity, Neurosci. Lett. 302 (2001) 49–52, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0304-3940(01)01656-1.
[23] W. Klimesch, M. Doppelmayr, H. Russegger, T. Pachinger, Theta band power in the
human scalp EEG and the encoding of new information, Neuroreport. 7 (1996)
1235–1240.
[24] J. Sarnthein, H. Petsche, P. Rappelsberger, G.L. Shaw, A. von Stein, Synchronization
between prefrontal and posterior association cortex during human working
memory, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95 (1998) 7092–7096.
[25] P. Sauseng, W. Klimesch, M. Doppelmayr, S. Hanslmayr, M. Schabus, W.R. Gruber,
Theta coupling in the human electroencephalogram during a working memory task,
Neurosci. Lett. 354 (2004) 123–126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2003.10.
002.
[26] N.R. Cooper, R.J. Croft, S.J.J. Dominey, A.P. Burgess, J.H. Gruzelier, Paradox lost?
Exploring the role of alpha oscillations during externally vs. internally directed
attention and the implications for idling and inhibition hypotheses, Int. J.
Psychophysiol. 47 (2003) 65–74, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(02)
00107-1.
[27] J.J. Foxe, A.C. Snyder, The role of alpha-band brain oscillations as a sensory sup-
pression mechanism during selective attention, Front. Psychol. 2 (2011) 1–13,
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00154.
[28] L. Payne, S. Guillory, R. Sekuler, Attention-modulated alpha-band oscillations
protect against intrusion of irrelevant information, J. Cogn. Neurosci. 25 (2013)
1463–1476, https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00395.
[29] E. Basar, C. Basar-Eroglu, S. Karakas, M. Schürmann, Brain oscillations in percep-
tion and memory, Int. J. Psychophysiol. 35 (2000) 95–124, https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0167-8760(99)00047-1.
[30] C. Tallon-Baudry, O. Bertrand, C. Delpuech, J. Pernier, Stimulus specificity of
phase-locked and non-phase-locked 40 Hz visual responses in human, J. Neurosci.
16 (1996) 4240–4249, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.02.038.
[31] M.A. Guevara, M. Corsi-Cabrera, EEG coherence or EEG correlation? Int. J.
Psychophysiol. 23 (1996) 145–153, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(96)
00038-4.
[32] M. Corsi-Cabrera, C. Arce, J. Ramos, M.A. Guevara, Effect of spatial ability and sex
on EEG power in high school students, Int. J. Psychophysiol. 20 (1997) 5–11,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8760(95)00022-K.
[33] T. Costa, E. Rognoni, D. Galati, EEG phase synchronization during emotional re-
sponse to positive and negative film stimuli, Neurosci. Lett. 406 (2006) 159–164,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2006.06.039.
[34] A. Diamond, Executive functions, Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 64 (2014) 135–168,
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750.Executive.
[35] N. Gogtay, J.N. Giedd, L. Lusk, K.M. Hayashi, D. Greenstein, a C. Vaituzis, T.F.
Nugent, D.H. Herman, L.S. Clasen, A.W. Toga, J.L. Rapoport, P.M. Thompson,
Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early
adulthood., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101 (2004) 8174–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.
0402680101.
[36] A.W. Toga, P.M. Thompson, E.R. Sowell, Mapping brain maturation, Trends
Neurosci. 29 (2006) 148–159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2006.01.007.
[37] K. Lucas, J.L. Sherry, K. Lucas, J.L. Sherry, Sex differences in video game play: a
communication-based explanation a communication-based explanation,
Entertaiment Softw. Assoc. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204267930.
[38] Entertainment Software Association, Essential Facts About the computer and video
game industry, 2018, 1–20 < http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/
05/EF2018_FINAL.pdf > .
[39] W.R. Boot, A.F. Kramer, D.J. Simons, M. Fabiani, G. Gratton, The effects of video
game playing on attention, memory, and executive control, Acta Psychol. (Amst)
129 (2008) 387–398, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.005.
[40] D. Wechsler, WAIS-IV: Escala de Inteligencia de Wechsler para Adultos-IV, Manual
Moderno, México, 2012.
[41] F. Ostrosky-Solís, A. Ardila, M. Rosselli, NEUROPSI: evaluación neuropsicológica
breve en Español, Manual Moderno, México, 1997.
[42] M.A. Guevara, A. Sanz-Martin, M. Hernández-González, I.K. Sandoval-Carrillo,
CubMemPC: Prueba Computarizada para Evaluar la Memoria a Corto Plazo
Visoespacial con y sin Distractores, Rev. Mex. Ing. Biomed. 35 (2014) 175–186.
[43] H.H. Jasper, The ten twenty electrode system of the international federation,
Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 371–375 (1958).
[44] M.A. Guevara, A. Sanz-Martín, M. Corsi-Cabrera, C. Amezcua-Gutiérrez,
M. Hernández-González, CHECASEN: programa para revisar señales EEG fuera de
línea, Rev. Mex. Ing. Biomédica. 2 (2010) 135–141 http://www.redalyc.org/
articulo.oa?id=61936298005.
[45] M.A. Guevara, M. Hernández-González, EEGmagic: programa para analizar señales
electroencefalográficas, Rev. Mex. Ing. Biomédica. 30 (2009) 41–53.
[46] P.L. Nunez, R. Srinivasan, A.F. Westdorp, R.S. Wijesinghe, D.M. Tucker,
R.B. Silberstein, P.J. Cadusch, EEG coherency I: statistics, reference electrode, vo-
lume conduction, Laplacians, cortical imaging, and interpretation at multiple
scales, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 103 (1997) 499–515, https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00066-7.
[47] J. Mocks, T. Gassers, How to select epochs of the EEG at rest for quantitative
analysis, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 58 (1984) 89–92.
[48] S. Solís-Ortiz, J. Ramos, C. Arce, M.A. Guevara, EEG Oscillations during menstrual
cycle, 76 (1994) 279–292.
J. Llamas-Alonso, et al.
[49] S.M. Jaeggi, M. Buschkuehl, J. Jonides, W.J. Perrig, Improving fluid intelligence
with training on working memory, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 19 (2008) 6829–6833,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0801268105.
[50] S.M. Jaeggi, M. Buschkuehl, W.J. Perrig, B. Meier, The concurrent validity of the N-
back task as a working memory measure, 18 (2010) 394–412. doi: 10.1080/
09658211003702171.
[51] N. Lavie, A. Hirst, J.W. De Fockert, E. Viding, Load theory of selective attention and
cognitive control, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 133 (2004) 339–354, https://doi.org/10.
1037/0096-3445.133.3.339.
[52] K. Oberauer, Binding and inhibition in working memory: individual and age dif-
ferences in short-term recognition, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 134 (2005) 368–387,
https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.3.368.
[53] W.J. Freeman, L.J. Rogers, M.D. Holmes, D.L. Silbergeld, Spatial spectral analysis of
human electrocorticograms including the alpha and gamma bands, J. Neurosci.
Methods. 95 (2000) 111–121, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0270(99)00160-0.
[54] E.L. Maclin, K.E. Mathewson, K.A. Low, W.R. Boot, A.F. Kramer, M. Fabiani,
G. Gratton, Learning to multitask: effects of video game practice on electro-
physiological indices of attention and resource allocation, Psychophysiology 48
(2011) 1173–1183, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01189.x.
[55] S. Sanei, J.A. Chambers, EEG signal processing, John Wiley, UK, 2007 < http://
scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:No+Title#0 > .
[56] A. Wróbel, Beta activity: a carrier for visual attention, Acta Neurobiol. Exp. (Wars)
60 (2000) 247–260 < https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12410645
Beta > .
[57] J. Kamiński, A. Brzezicka, M. Gola, A. Wróbel, Beta band oscillations engagement in
human alertness process, Int. J. Psychophysiol. 85 (2011) 125–128, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.11.006.
[58] M.W. Howard, D.S. Rizzuto, J.B. Caplan, J.R. Madsen, J. Lisman, R. Aschenbrenner-
Scheibe, Gamma oscillations correlate with working memory load in humans,
Cereb. Cortex. 13 (2003) 1369–1374, https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhg084.
[59] J. Bhattacharya, H. Petsche, U. Feldmann, B. Rescher, EEG gamma-band phase
Entertainment Computing 30 (2019) 100302
synchronization between posterior and frontal cortex during mental rotation in
humans, Neurosci. Lett. 311 (2001) 29–32, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-
3940(01)02133-4.
[60] E.K. Miller, C.A. Erickson, R. Desimone, Neural mechanisms of visual working
memory in prefrontal cortex of the macaque 16 (1996) 5154–5167.
[61] G. Rainer, W.F. Asaad, E.K. Miller, Selective representation of relevant information
by neurons in the primate prefrontal cortex, Nature 393 (1998) 577–579, https://
doi.org/10.1038/31235.
[62] E.K. Miller, J.D. Cohen, An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function, Annu.
Rev. Neurosci. 24 (2001) 167–202, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.
167.
[63] K. Sakai, R.E. Passingham, Prefrontal interactions reflect future task operations,
Nat. Neurosci. 6 (2003) 75–81, https://doi.org/10.1038/nn987.
[64] S.P. Deeny, A.J. Haufler, M. Saffer, B.D. Hatfield, Electroencephalographic co-
herence during visuomotor performance: a comparison of cortico-cortical commu-
nication in experts and novices, J. Mot. Behav. 41 (2009) 106–116, https://doi.org/
10.3200/JMBR.41.2.106-116.
[65] E. Koechlin, G. Basso, P. Pietrini, S. Panzer, J.H. Grafman, The role of the anterior
prefrontal cortex in human cognition, Nature 399 (1999) 148–151, https://doi.org/
10.1038/20178.
[66] A.S. Finn, M.A. Sheridan, C.L.H. Kam, S. Hinshaw, M.D. D’Esposito, Longitudinal
evidence for functional specialization of the neural circuit supporting working
memory in the human brain, J. Neurosci. 30 (2010) 11062–11067, https://doi.org/
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6266-09.2010.
[67] J.D. Cohen, W.M. Perlstein, T.S. Braver, L.E. Nystrom, D.C. Noll, J. Jonides,
E.E. Smith, Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task,
Nature 386 (1997) 604–608, https://doi.org/10.1038/386604a0.
[68] M. D’Esposito, J.A. Detre, D.C. Alsop, R.K. Shin, S. Atlas, M. Grossman, The neural
basis of the central executive system of working memory, Nature 378 (1995)
279–281, https://doi.org/10.1038/378279a0.