Reasoning about counterintuitive concepts in science and math is thought to require suppressing naive theories, prior knowledge, or misleading perceptual cues through inhibitory control. Neuroimaging research has shown recruitment of pFC regions during counterintuitive reasoning, which has been interpreted as evidence of inhibitory control processes. However, the results are inconsistent across studies and have not been directly compared with behavior or brain activity during inhibitory control tasks. In this fMRI study, 34 adolescents (aged 11–15 years) answered science and math problems and completed response inhibition tasks (simple and complex go/no-go) and an interference control task (numerical Stroop). Increased BOLD signal was observed in parietal (Brodmann's area 40) and prefrontal (Brodmann's area 8, 45/47) cortex regions in counterintuitive problems compared with control problems, where no counterintuitive reasoning was required, and in two parietal clusters when comparing correct counterintuitive reasoning to giving the incorrect intuitive response. There was partial overlap between increases in BOLD signal in the complex response inhibition and interference control tasks and the science and math contrasts. However, multivariate analyses suggested overlapping neural substrates in the parietal cortex only, in regions typically associated with working memory and visuospatial attentional demands rather than specific to inhibitory control. These results highlight the importance of using localizer tasks and a range of analytic approach to investigate to what extent common neural networks underlie performance of different cognitive tasks and suggests visuospatial attentional skills may support counterintuitive reasoning in science and math.

Prospective memory (PM) refers to the cognitive processes associated with remembering to perform an intended action after a delay. Varying the salience of PM cues while keeping the intended response constant, we investigated the extent to which participants relied on strategic monitoring, through sustained, top–down control, or on spontaneous retrieval via transient bottom–up processes. There is mixed evidence regarding developmental improvements in event-based PM performance after the age of 13 years. We compared PM performance and associated sustained and transient neural correlates in 28 typically developing adolescents (12–17 years old) and 19 adults (23–30 years old). Lower PM cue salience associated with slower ongoing task (OT) RTs, reflected by increased μ ex-Gaussian parameter, and sustained increases in frontoparietal activation during OT blocks, both thought to reflect greater proactive control supporting cue monitoring. Behavioral and neural correlates of PM trials were not specifically modulated by cue salience, revealing little difference in reactive control between conditions. The effect of cue salience was similar across age groups, suggesting that adolescents are able to adapt proactive control engagement to PM task demands. Exploratory analyses showed that younger, but not older, adolescents were less accurate and slower in PM trials relative to OT trials than adults and showed greater transient activation in PM trials in an occipito-temporal cluster. These results provide evidence of both mature and still maturing aspects of cognitive processes associated with implementation of an intention after a delay during early adolescence.

Reasoning during social interactions requires the individual manipulation of mental representations of one's own traits and those of other people as well as their joint consideration (relational integration). Research using nonsocial paradigms has linked relational integration to activity in the rostrolateral PFC. Here, we investigated whether social reasoning is supported by the same general system or whether it additionally relies on regions of the social brain network, such as the medial PFC. We further assessed the development of social reasoning. In the social task, participants evaluated themselves or a friend, or compared themselves with their friend, on a series of traits. In the nonsocial task, participants evaluated their hometown or another town or compared the two. In a behavioral study involving 325 participants (11–39 years old), we found that integrating relations, compared with performing single relational judgments, improves during adolescence, both for social and nonsocial information. Thirty-nine female participants (10–31 years old) took part in a neuroimaging study using a similar task. Activation of the relational integration network, including the rostrolateral PFC, was observed in the comparison condition of both the social and nonsocial tasks, whereas the medial PFC showed greater activation when participants processed social as opposed to nonsocial information across conditions. Developmentally, the right anterior insula showed greater activity in adolescents compared with adults during the comparison of nonsocial versus social information. This study shows parallel recruitment of the social brain and the relational reasoning network during the relational integration of social information in adolescence and adulthood.

Our everyday actions are often performed in the context of a social interaction. We previously showed that, in adults, selecting an action on the basis of either social or symbolic cues was associated with activations in the fronto-parietal cognitive control network, whereas the presence and use of social versus symbolic cues was in addition associated with activations in the temporal and medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) social brain network. Here we investigated developmental changes in these two networks. Fourteen adults (21–30 years of age) and 14 adolescents (11–16 years) followed instructions to move objects in a set of shelves. Interpretation of the instructions was conditional on the point of view of a visible “director” or the meaning of a symbolic cue (Director Present vs. Director Absent) and the number of potential referent objects in the shelves (3-object vs. 1-object). 3-object trials elicited increased fronto-parietal and temporal activations, with greater left lateral prefrontal cortex and parietal activations in adults than adolescents. Social versus symbolic information led to activations in superior dorsal MPFC, precuneus, and along the superior/middle temporal sulci. Both dorsal MPFC and left temporal clusters exhibited a Director × Object interaction, with greater activation when participants needed to consider the directors' viewpoints. This effect differed with age in dorsal MPFC. Adolescents showed greater activation whenever social information was present, whereas adults showed greater activation only when the directors' viewpoints were relevant to task performance. This study thus shows developmental differences in domain-general and domain-specific PFC activations associated with action selection in a social interaction context.

Severe capacity limits, closely associated with fluid intelligence, arise in learning and use of new task rules. We used fMRI to investigate these limits in a series of multirule tasks involving different stimuli, rules, and response keys. Data were analyzed both during presentation of instructions and during later task execution. Between tasks, we manipulated the number of rules specified in task instructions, and within tasks, we manipulated the number of rules operative in each trial block. Replicating previous results, rule failures were strongly predicted by fluid intelligence and increased with the number of operative rules. In fMRI data, analyses of the instruction period showed that the bilateral inferior frontal sulcus, intraparietal sulcus, and presupplementary motor area were phasically active with presentation of each new rule. In a broader range of frontal and parietal regions, baseline activity gradually increased as successive rules were instructed. During task performance, we observed contrasting fronto-parietal patterns of sustained (block-related) and transient (trial-related) activity. Block, but not trial, activity showed effects of task complexity. We suggest that, as a new task is learned, a fronto-parietal representation of relevant rules and facts is assembled for future control of behavior. Capacity limits in learning and executing new rules, and their association with fluid intelligence, may be mediated by this load-sensitive fronto-parietal network.