Fig 1.
General structure of the experimental paradigm.
Independently from the condition, the strings of letters for the LDT were presented until a response was given, or for a maximum of 3000 ms. Hence, a blank screen was presented for 1000 ms, followed by a fixation cross displayed for an interval of 1500 ± 250 ms. A) In the Baseline condition, participants only had to perform the LDT. B) In the Monitoring-Load condition, participants were instructed to perform the LDT and to press a different button when the syllable “PRA” appeared. C) In the Memory-Load condition, participants were asked to perform the LDT and to to press three different buttons at the presentation of three underlined words (AZZURRO, GRIGIO, and ROSSO).
Fig 2.
Schematic representation of the pipeline followed to calculate IntraNC and InterNC values for each network.
A) The Destrieux regions belonging to the networks of interest (DMN, DAN, FPCN, and VAN) were selected to create a matrix of the AEC values between them; B) Brain regions were associated to the corresponding network, grouping the ones belonging to the DMN (green), DAN (blue), FPCN (yellow) and DAN (red); C) values of connectivity between regions belonging to the same network (IntraNC) and the ones between each pair of networks (InterNC) were averaged to obtain a 4x4 connectivity matrix at the network level.
Fig 3.
Networks presenting significant differences between InterNC and IntraNC in the alpha band.
Differences significant for p < .05 are displayed as black asterisks, whereas those significant for q < .05 are marked with a white diamond. The scale on the left represents t-values derived from statistical comparisons. DMN: Default Mode Network; DAN: Dorsal Attention Network; FPCN: FrontoParietal Control Network; VAN: Ventral Attention Network.
Fig 4.
Networks presenting significant differences between InterNC and IntraNC in the theta band.
Differences significant for p < .05 are displayed as black asterisks, whereas those significant for q < .05 are marked with a white diamond. The scale on the left represents t-values derived from statistical comparisons. DMN: Default Mode Network; DAN: Dorsal Attention Network; FPCN: FrontoParietal Control Network; VAN: Ventral Attention Network.
Fig 5.
Comparison of Functional Connectivity in the three conditions in the alpha band.
A. Comparison between the Monitoring-load and the Baseline conditions; B. Comparison between the Maintenance-load and the Baseline conditions; C. Comparison between the two PM conditions. Differences significant for p < .05 are displayed as black asterisks, whereas those significant for q < .05 are marked with a white diamond. The scale on the left represents t-values derived from statistical comparisons. DMN: Default Mode Network; DAN: Dorsal Attention Network; FPCN: FrontoParietal Control Network; VAN: Ventral Attention Network.
Fig 6.
Comparison of Functional Connectivity in the three conditions in the theta band.
A. Comparison between the Monitoring-load and the Baseline conditions; B. Comparison between the Maintenance-load and the Baseline conditions; C. Comparison between the two PM conditions. Differences significant for p < .05 are displayed as black asterisks, whereas those significant for q < .05 are marked with a white diamond. The scale on the left represents t-values derived from statistical comparisons. DMN: Default Mode Network; DAN: Dorsal Attention Network; FPCN: FrontoParietal Control Network; VAN: Ventral Attention Network.
Table 1.
Connectivity-response times correlations.
Fig 7.
Comparison of log-transformed power spectra in the alpha band.
Comparison of Alpha power for each each network in the three conditions. The asterisk represents significant differences between conditions (q < .05). DMN: Default Mode Network; DAN: Dorsal Attention Network; FPCN: FrontoParietal Control Network; VAN: Ventral Attention Network.