There was a lack of consensus on multiple issues with considerable concern about several management issues including reactive, not proactive approaches, incomplete stakeholder representation and limited control of coastal construction.
Alternatively, processes related to cognitive control computed in frontal regions could resolve competition among active representation [31], or suppress proactive interference [32], [33].
It is also possible that interference effects in WM might be reduced through proactive control mechanisms, such as active maintenance of task-relevant goal representations during the delay period.
Therefore, one might explain our results as showing that proactive control mechanisms promote controlled access to episodic memory (i.e., contextual representations), and reactive control mechanisms perform selection among activated and competing representations.
Proactive activity in lateral PFC may reflect the preparation and maintenance of task-goal representations, to facilitate the optimal updating and integration of memory-set information into an attentional bias regarding the upcoming probe.
The current results suggest that the active maintenance of goal representations in WM may be a viable method of preventing interference in a proactive manner.
An error to the Prior goal arm indicates proactive interference from the prior day's trial, while an error to one of the two Adjacent arms indicates weakened representation of the current goal location.
— proactive for the Haggler.
