Literature DB >> 31742470

Leveling the Field for a Fairer Race between Going and Stopping: Neural Evidence for the Race Model of Motor Inhibition from a New Version of the Stop Signal Task.

Tobin Dykstra1, Darcy A Waller1, Eliot Hazeltine1, Jan R Wessel1,2.   

Abstract

The stop signal task (SST) is the gold standard experimental model of inhibitory control. However, neither SST condition-contrast (stop vs. go, successful vs. failed stop) purely operationalizes inhibition. Because stop trials include a second, infrequent signal, the stop versus go contrast confounds inhibition with attentional and stimulus processing demands. While this confound is controlled for in the successful versus failed stop contrast, the go process is systematically faster on failed stop trials, contaminating the contrast with a different noninhibitory confound. Here, we present an SST variant to address both confounds and evaluate putative neural indices of inhibition with these influences removed. In our variant, stop signals occurred on every trial, equating the noninhibitory demands of the stop versus go contrast. To entice participants to respond despite the impending stop signals, responses produced before stop signals were rewarded. This also reversed the go process bias that typically affects the successful versus failed stop contrast. We recorded scalp electroencephalography in this new version of the task (as well as a standard version of the SST with infrequent stop signal) and found that, even under these conditions, the properties of the frontocentral stop signal P3 ERP remained consistent with the race model. Specifically, in both tasks, the amplitude of the P3 was increased on stop versus go trials. Moreover, the onset of this P3 occurred earlier for successful compared with failed stop trials in both tasks, consistent with the proposal of the race model that an earlier start of the inhibition process will increase stopping success. Therefore, the frontocentral stop signal P3 represents a neural process whose properties are in line with the predictions of the race model of motor inhibition, even when the SST's confounds are controlled.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31742470     DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01503

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


  3 in total

1.  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

2.  Non-selective inhibition of the motor system following unexpected and expected infrequent events.

Authors:  Carly Iacullo; Darcy A Diesburg; Jan R Wessel
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2020-09-19       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  The Pause-then-Cancel model of human action-stopping: Theoretical considerations and empirical evidence.

Authors:  Darcy A Diesburg; Jan R Wessel
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 9.052

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.