Literature DB >> 16014077

Effects of stop signal modality, stop signal intensity and tracking method on inhibitory performance as determined by use of the stop signal paradigm.

Menno van der Schoot1, Robert Licht, Tako M Horsley, Joseph A Sergeant.   

Abstract

In Experiment 1, the effects of stop signal modality on the speed and efficiency of the inhibition process were examined. Stop signal reaction time (SSRT) and inhibition function slope in an auditory stop signal condition were compared to SSRT and inhibition function slope in a visual stop signal condition. It was found that auditory stop signals compared to visual stop signals enhanced both the speed and efficiency of stopping. The modality effects were attributed to differences in the neurophysiological processes underlying perception. However, Experiment 2 demonstrated that the modality difference was larger for 80 dB(A) auditory stop signals than 60 dB(A) auditory stop signals. This effect was reconciled with the suggestion that loud tones are more capable of eliciting immediate arousing effects on motor processes than weak tones and visual stimuli. The second purpose of the present investigation was to explore the utility (and potential advantages) of an alternative way of setting stop signal delay relative to mean reaction time (MRT). The method that was suggested compensates for inter-individual differences in primary task reaction speed by setting stop signal delays as proportions of the subjects' MRT.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16014077     DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00463.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Psychol        ISSN: 0036-5564


  13 in total

1.  The point of no return in planar hand movements: an indication of the existence of high level motion primitives.

Authors:  Ronen Sosnik; Moshe Shemesh; Moshe Abeles
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 5.082

2.  Visual salience of the stop-signal affects movement suppression process.

Authors:  Roberto Montanari; Margherita Giamundo; Emiliano Brunamonti; Stefano Ferraina; Pierpaolo Pani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Motivational influences on response inhibition measures.

Authors:  Lauren A Leotti; Tor D Wager
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 4.  Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms.

Authors:  Frederick Verbruggen; Gordon D Logan
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2008-09-04       Impact factor: 8.989

5.  On the role of the striatum in response inhibition.

Authors:  Bram B Zandbelt; Matthijs Vink
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Response inhibition during perceptual decision making in humans and macaques.

Authors:  Paul G Middlebrooks; Jeffrey D Schall
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Moderate acute alcohol use impairs intentional inhibition rather than stimulus-driven inhibition.

Authors:  Yang Liu; Raoul P P P Grasman; Reinout W Wiers; K Richard Ridderinkhof; Wery P M van den Wildenberg
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2020-05-19

8.  Lifespan changes in global and selective stopping and performance adjustments.

Authors:  Maria C van de Laar; Wery P M van den Wildenberg; Geert J M van Boxtel; Maurits W van der Molen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-12-15

9.  OSARI, an Open-Source Anticipated Response Inhibition Task.

Authors:  Jason L He; Rebecca J Hirst; Rohan Puri; James Coxon; Winston Byblow; Mark Hinder; Patrick Skippen; Dora Matzke; Andrew Heathcote; Corey G Wadsley; Tim Silk; Christian Hyde; Dinisha Parmar; Ernest Pedapati; Donald L Gilbert; David A Huddleston; Stewart Mostofsky; Inge Leunissen; Hayley J MacDonald; Nahian S Chowdhury; Matthew Gretton; Tess Nikitenko; Bram Zandbelt; Luke Strickland; Nicolaas A J Puts
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-11-09

10.  The relationship between Stroop and stop-signal measures of inhibition in adolescents: influences from variations in context and measure estimation.

Authors:  Kiat Hui Khng; Kerry Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.