Literature DB >> 20849230

Electrophysiological evidence for different inhibitory mechanisms when stopping or changing a planned response.

Ulrike M Krämer1, Robert T Knight, Thomas F Münte.   

Abstract

People are able to adapt their behavior to changing environmental contingencies by rapidly inhibiting or modifying their actions. Response inhibition is often studied in the stop-signal paradigm that requires the suppression of an already prepared motor response. Less is known about situations calling for a change of motor plans such that the prepared response has to be withheld but another has to be executed instead. In the present study, we investigated whether electrophysiological data can provide evidence for distinct inhibitory mechanisms when stopping or changing a response. Participants were instructed to perform in a choice RT task with two classes of embedded critical trials: Stop signals called for the inhibition of any response, whereas change signals required participants to inhibit the prepared response and execute another one instead. Under both conditions, we observed differences in go-stimulus processing, suggesting a faster response preparation in failed compared with successful inhibitions. In contrast to stop-signal trials, changing a response did not elicit the inhibition-related frontal N2 and did not modulate the parietal mu power decrease. The results suggest that compared with changing a response, additional frontal and parietal regions are engaged when having to inhibit a response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20849230     DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21573

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  26 in total

1.  Impact of orbitofrontal lesions on electrophysiological signals in a stop signal task.

Authors:  Anne-Kristin Solbakk; Ingrid Funderud; Marianne Løvstad; Tor Endestad; Torstein Meling; Magnus Lindgren; Robert T Knight; Ulrike M Krämer
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Selective and nonselective inhibition of competitors in picture naming.

Authors:  Zeshu Shao; Antje S Meyer; Ardi Roelofs
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-11

3.  Filling the void-enriching the feature space of successful stopping.

Authors:  René J Huster; Signe Schneider; Christina F Lavallee; Stefanie Enriquez-Geppert; Christoph S Herrmann
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Frontal and motor cortex contributions to response inhibition: evidence from electrocorticography.

Authors:  Yvonne M Fonken; Jochem W Rieger; Elinor Tzvi; Nathan E Crone; Edward Chang; Josef Parvizi; Robert T Knight; Ulrike M Krämer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  When the brain simulates stopping: Neural activity recorded during real and imagined stop-signal tasks.

Authors:  Alberto J González-Villar; F Mauricio Bonilla; María T Carrillo-de-la-Peña
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.282

6.  Inhibitory motor control based on complex stopping goals relies on the same brain network as simple stopping.

Authors:  Jan R Wessel; Adam R Aron
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  The role of the lateral prefrontal cortex in inhibitory motor control.

Authors:  Ulrike M Krämer; Anne-Kristin Solbakk; Ingrid Funderud; Marianne Løvstad; Tor Endestad; Robert T Knight
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 4.027

8.  Neuro-Behavioral Dynamic Prediction of Interpersonal Cooperation and Aggression.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Chao Fu; Xiangzeng Kong; Roman Osinsky; Johannes Hewig; Yiwen Wang
Journal:  Neurosci Bull       Date:  2021-10-10       Impact factor: 5.203

9.  A Single Mechanism for Global and Selective Response Inhibition under the Influence of Motor Preparation.

Authors:  Liisa Raud; René J Huster; Richard B Ivry; Ludovica Labruna; Mari S Messel; Ian Greenhouse
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Online Movement Correction in Response to the Unexpectedly Perturbed Initial or Final Action Goals: An ERP and sLORETA Study.

Authors:  Lin Yu; Thomas Schack; Dirk Koester
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-05-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.