Talk:Executive functions

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine B‑class Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

cognitive control

I suggest to change the title of this article to 'cognitive control' and redirect 'executive functions' to it rather than the other way around. In the recent high-impact scientific literature the term 'executive functions' seems to have fallen out of favor.146.50.209.116 (talk) 01:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't agree with this. The term "cognitive control" is very nebulous, whereas at least scientists generally understand what "executive function" is supposed to mean. Also, I believe the term is still pretty widely used. (I myself am not fond of it, but that's another story...) In any case, this article as written really doesn't capture the literature very well. Looie496 (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree. "Executive functions" is the more widely used term, both in Google and in leading neuroscience textbooks,such as Kolb & Whishaw, Fundamentals of Human Neuropsychology (2008). Furthermore, the expression "Executive functions" is a very broad one, whereas the expression "cognitive control" also can be used in a very specific way: for example the cognitive control of movement. --Lova Falk (talk) 08:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where's everything else

The Basal Ganglia are missing138.246.7.136 (talk) 11:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please, feel free to be bold and add them! --Lova Falk (talk) 16:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miller and Cohen language

The proper format is "Earl Miller, Ph.D."

"Dr. Earl Miller" is incorrect. So is "Dr. Earl Miller, Ph.D."

Usually, in academic publications, supported by citations, you don't mention the degree, on the assumption that the person who did the research is a professor and has an appropriate degree. So, "Earl Miller," or "Earl Miller of University of Whatever" is acceptable.

Sorry, I don't know if wikipedia has exact standards for this sort of thing. I don't have an account, so I'm not going to alter the article.69.225.5.72 (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need an account to edit the great majority of articles, including this one. But I went ahead and made the change anyway. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 21:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Executive Dysfunction

I'm somewhat disappointed at the quality and organization of this article. Executive Functions is an important topic that reaches into a huge range of areas in psychology. In particular, I take issue with the redirection of "executive dysfunction" to this article. There is only a single mention of it within the article body (as well as a mention of Dysexecutive Syndrom). I propose a separate section for Executive Dysfunction focusing more on psychopathology and issues relating to it. There is currently an article for "Dysexecutive Syndrome," and I think that article could be merged into a broader Executive Dysfunction article. I realize this is a drastic change, but I am currently working with a group of students to create such an article and we are quite prepared to make a well-organized and comprehensive contribution. Such an article would include discussion of executive dysfunction from neuropsychological, medical, socio-cultural and educational perspectives (among others).

We are beginning the project today, so please respond ASAP. Thank you! --FractalUniverse187 16:04, 05 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you follow the literature, I think this is an excellent plan. One point that wasn't completely clear: if multiple people are going to work on the article, each one should have a separate account. Looie496 (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response! It's part of an assignment for a university psychology course, so we'll work as a group and then post the results of our collaboration using the account provided by the course instructor. --FractalUniverse187 10:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Field independance?

I can't find any info on field independance/non independance..would be useful if someone knows about this, to have an article on it.. heres a link I found with some info

http://www.usd.edu/~ssanto/field.html

dankelly07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.229.68 (talk) 10:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think field-dependence vs. independence has gone dormant as a research topic. The "rod and frame" apparatus was used to assess it, and also a less cumbersome procedure called the embedded figures test.

Field-dependence was once believed to reflect a robust fundamental personality trait or cognitive style. As I recall, it turned out to be moderately correlated with a variety of other traits. With this sort of topic, the reasons research interest gradually dries up are often never published. You have to talk with an "insider," i.e., someone who was in the trenches, doing the research, to find out. And, sometimes, these topics simply "go out of fashion," typically when their advocates die or retire.

Field dependence is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on "cognitive style." I don't think it's particularly relevant to the topic of the present article. 69.225.5.72 (talk) 06:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

How can a system be also known as functions? Looks like apples and oranges to me. --CopperKettle 12:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Executive functions" are the functions that are carried out by the executive system. The executive system is the system that carries out executive functions. I agree that the wording of the article is very awkward, but I don't think it's a question of apples and oranges. Looie496 (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that. I pointed at the awkwardness. Just now did a stub at Russian Wiki, and it was hard to come up with definition there (0: --CopperKettle 16:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EF and Fluid Intelligence

I think there should be something describing how EF is related to fluid intelligence, and how studies suggest EF is seperable from IQ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.228.249 (talk) 00:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, if you have good references, be bold and write a section on this! Lova Falk talk 10:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous sentence?

"The executive system is thought to be heavily involved in handling novel situations outside the domain of some of our 'automatic' psychological processes that could be explained by the reproduction of learned schemas or set behaviors."

Is it clear whether "that" refers to the executive system or the 'automatic' psychological processes?

--83.250.74.141 (talk) 13:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]