OBJECTIVE: Current debate centres on the inhibitory and conflict interpretations of the N2 and P3 components of the event-related potential (ERP). We examined behavioural responses and ERPs in a cued-Go/NoGo task. METHODS: Participants were required to inhibit a planned response (NoGo target after Go cue), change a planned response to a different one (Invalid cueing), and activate an unexpected response (Go target after NoGo cue). RESULTS: Responses were slower when participants had to change a planned response, and execute an unplanned response. N2 was more negative whenever the presented target required a different response to what was expected based on the cue. In contrast, P3 was increased when participants had to change or inhibit a planned response, but not when executing a response where none was planned. CONCLUSIONS: N2 results lend support to the conflict account, while P3 reflects cancellation of a planned response. SIGNIFICANCE: This paper provides the first test of conflict involving activation of an unplanned response in a cued-Go/NoGo task. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVE: Current debate centres on the inhibitory and conflict interpretations of the N2 and P3 components of the event-related potential (ERP). We examined behavioural responses and ERPs in a cued-Go/NoGo task. METHODS:Participants were required to inhibit a planned response (NoGo target after Go cue), change a planned response to a different one (Invalid cueing), and activate an unexpected response (Go target after NoGo cue). RESULTS: Responses were slower when participants had to change a planned response, and execute an unplanned response. N2 was more negative whenever the presented target required a different response to what was expected based on the cue. In contrast, P3 was increased when participants had to change or inhibit a planned response, but not when executing a response where none was planned. CONCLUSIONS:N2 results lend support to the conflict account, while P3 reflects cancellation of a planned response. SIGNIFICANCE: This paper provides the first test of conflict involving activation of an unplanned response in a cued-Go/NoGo task. Copyright Â
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
Authors: Giuliana Lucci; Marika Berchicci; Donatella Spinelli; Francesco Taddei; Francesco Di Russo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kirk R Daffner; Elise C Tarbi; Anna E Haring; Tatyana Y Zhuravleva; Xue Sun; Dorene M Rentz; Phillip J Holcomb Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 3.169