Literature DB >> 23763667

EEG signatures associated with stopping are sensitive to preparation.

Ian Greenhouse1, Jan R Wessel.   

Abstract

Preparing to stop may "prime" the neural mechanism for stopping and alter brain activity at the time of stopping. Much electroencephalography (EEG) research has studied the N2/P3 complex over frontocentral electrodes during outright stopping. Here, we used differential reward of the stop and go processes in a stop signal task to study the sensitivity of these EEG components to preparation. We found that (a) stopping was faster when it was rewarded; (b) the P3 amplitude was larger for successful versus failed stopping, and this difference was greater when stopping was rewarded over going; (c) the N2 component was observed only on failed stop trials; and (d) there was greater EEG coherence between frontocentral and occipitoparietal electrodes at 12 Hz during the initiation of a go response when stopping was rewarded over going. We propose that frontocentral cortical mechanisms active before and at the time of stopping are sensitive to preparation.
Copyright © 2013 Society for Psychophysiological Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognition; Cognitive control; Coherence; EEG/ERP; Response inhibition

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23763667      PMCID: PMC3745550          DOI: 10.1111/psyp.12070

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  50 in total

1.  Principal components analysis of Laplacian waveforms as a generic method for identifying ERP generator patterns: I. Evaluation with auditory oddball tasks.

Authors:  Jürgen Kayser; Craig E Tenke
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2005-12-13       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  The auditory-evoked N2 and P3 components in the stop-signal task: indices of inhibition, response-conflict or error-detection?

Authors:  Aneta Dimoska; Stuart J Johnstone; Robert J Barry
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2006-06-30       Impact factor: 2.310

3.  Conflict and inhibition differentially affect the N200/P300 complex in a combined go/nogo and stop-signal task.

Authors:  Stefanie Enriquez-Geppert; Carsten Konrad; Christo Pantev; René J Huster
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  In search of the point of no return: the control of response processes.

Authors:  Ritske de Jong; Michael G H Coles; Gordon D Logan; Gabriele Gratton
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Electrophysiological activity underlying inhibitory control processes in normal adults.

Authors:  Mariana Schmajuk; Mario Liotti; Laura Busse; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 3.139

6.  An information-maximization approach to blind separation and blind deconvolution.

Authors:  A J Bell; T J Sejnowski
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.026

7.  Expectation-driven changes in cortical functional connectivity influence working memory and long-term memory performance.

Authors:  Jacob Bollinger; Michael T Rubens; Theodore P Zanto; Adam Gazzaley
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Striatal dysfunction in schizophrenia and unaffected relatives.

Authors:  Matthijs Vink; Nick F Ramsey; Mathijs Raemaekers; René S Kahn
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 13.382

9.  Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm.

Authors:  Frederick Verbruggen; Gordon D Logan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Causal role of the prefrontal cortex in top-down modulation of visual processing and working memory.

Authors:  Theodore P Zanto; Michael T Rubens; Arul Thangavel; Adam Gazzaley
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2011-03-27       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  27 in total

1.  Event-related fields evoked by vocal response inhibition: a comparison of younger and older adults.

Authors:  Leidy J Castro-Meneses; Blake W Johnson; Paul F Sowman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Unexpected events induce motor slowing via a brain mechanism for action-stopping with global suppressive effects.

Authors:  Jan R Wessel; Adam R Aron
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Physiological Markers of Motor Inhibition during Human Behavior.

Authors:  Julie Duque; Ian Greenhouse; Ludovica Labruna; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 13.837

4.  It's not too late: the onset of the frontocentral P3 indexes successful response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm.

Authors:  Jan R Wessel; Adam R Aron
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Perceptual Surprise Improves Action Stopping by Nonselectively Suppressing Motor Activity via a Neural Mechanism for Motor Inhibition.

Authors:  Isabella C Dutra; Darcy A Waller; Jan R Wessel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Investigating limits of task prioritization in dual-tasking: evidence from the prioritized processing and the psychological refractory period paradigms.

Authors:  Tobias Rieger; Victor Mittelstädt; David Dignath; Andrea Kiesel
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2019-09-24

7.  β-Bursts Reveal the Trial-to-Trial Dynamics of Movement Initiation and Cancellation.

Authors:  Jan R Wessel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  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

9.  Alcohol affects the P3 component of an adaptive stop signal task ERP.

Authors:  Martin H Plawecki; Kyle A Windisch; Leah Wetherill; Ann E K Kosobud; Mario Dzemidzic; David A Kareken; Sean J O'Connor
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 2.405

10.  Inhibition-related differences between tic-free and tic-related obsessive-compulsive disorder: evidence from the N2 and P3.

Authors:  L Kloft; A Riesel; N Kathmann
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.