Literature DB >> 10344188

ERP components in Go/Nogo tasks and their relation to inhibition.

M Falkenstein1, J Hoormann, J Hohnsbein.   

Abstract

In visual Go/Nogo tasks the ERP usually shows a frontal negativity after Nogo stimuli ("Nogo-N2"), which possibly reflects an inhibition process. However, the Nogo-N2 appears to be very small after auditory stimuli, which is evidence against the inhibition hypothesis. In the present study we tested this hypothesis by evaluating performance differences between subjects. Assuming that for Ss with a high false alarm rate the inhibition process is weakened and/or delayed, they should reveal a smaller and/or later Nogo-N2 than Ss with a low false alarm rate. This prediction was confirmed, which supports the inhibition hypothesis. However, the Nogo-N2 was again much smaller and had a different topography after auditory than after visual stimuli despite similar performance in both modalities. This modality asymmetry was explained by assuming that the inhibitory mechanism reflected in the Nogo-N2 is located at a pre-motor rather than at the motor level. In the second part of the study we compared the Nogo-N2 with a similar phenomenon, the error negativity (Ne), which occurs in trials with commission errors (false alarms). Earlier work suggests that the Ne is a correlate of error detection or inhibition. This raises the possibility that the Ne is a delayed Nogo-N2, i.e., the Ne may reflect a late and hence unsuccessful attempt to inhibit the response after a nontarget. However, the Ne amplitude showed no difference between performance groups and stimulus modalities, as found for the Nogo-N2. Moreover, Ne and Nogo-N2 had different scalp topographies. This suggests that different mechanisms and generators underlie the Ne and the Nogo-N2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10344188     DOI: 10.1016/s0001-6918(99)00008-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)        ISSN: 0001-6918


  246 in total

1.  The relationship between reaction time and response variability and somatosensory No-go potentials.

Authors:  Hiroki Nakata; Kiwako Sakamoto; Ryusuke Kakigi
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Changing plans: neural correlates of executive control in monkey and human frontal cortex.

Authors:  Elisa C Dias; Tammy McGinnis; John F Smiley; John J Foxe; Charles E Schroeder; Daniel C Javitt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-04-25       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: effects of response conflict and trial type frequency.

Authors:  Sander Nieuwenhuis; Nick Yeung; Wery van den Wildenberg; K Richard Ridderinkhof
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.282

4.  Stimulus and response ERP analyses of a two-level reaction time task.

Authors:  Andres Posada; Pascal Vianin; Marie-Hélène Giard; Nicolas Franck
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-07-22       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Differential influences of exercise intensity on information processing in the central nervous system.

Authors:  Keita Kamijo; Yoshiaki Nishihira; Arihiro Hatta; Takeshi Kaneda; Toshiaki Wasaka; Tetsuo Kida; Kazuo Kuroiwa
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2004-04-09       Impact factor: 3.078

6.  Neurocognitive deficits in male alcoholics: an ERP/sLORETA analysis of the N2 component in an equal probability Go/NoGo task.

Authors:  A K Pandey; C Kamarajan; Y Tang; D B Chorlian; B N Roopesh; N Manz; A Stimus; M Rangaswamy; B Porjesz
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 3.251

7.  Emotions in cognitive conflicts are not aversive but are task specific.

Authors:  Annekathrin Schacht; Olaf Dimigen; Werner Sommer
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Brain dynamics underlying training-induced improvement in suppressing inappropriate action.

Authors:  Aurelie L Manuel; Jeremy Grivel; Fosco Bernasconi; Micah M Murray; Lucas Spierer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Inhibiting prepotent responses in the elderly: Distraction and disinhibition.

Authors:  Shulan Hsieh; Mengyao Wu; Chien-Hui Tang
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.282

10.  Protracted impairment of impulse control under an acute dose of alcohol: a time-course analysis.

Authors:  Melissa A Miller; Mark T Fillmore
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 3.913

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.