scholarly journals Motor inhibition processes in Go/No-Go and Stop Signal Tasks: New insight from mouse tracking

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 2146
Author(s):  
Viola Benedetti ◽  
Gioele Gavazzi ◽  
Fabio Giovannelli ◽  
Riccardo Bravi ◽  
Stefano Grasso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stop Signal ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Mouse Tracking

scholarly journals Mouse Tracking to Explore Motor Inhibition Processes in Go/No-Go and Stop Signal Tasks

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viola Benedetti ◽  
Gioele Gavazzi ◽  
Fabio Giovannelli ◽  
Riccardo Bravi ◽  
Fiorenza Giganti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Discrete Variables ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Mouse Tracking ◽  
Reactive Component ◽  
Key Press ◽  
Press Method

Response inhibition relies on both proactive and reactive mechanisms that exert a synergic control on goal-directed actions. It is typically evaluated by the go/no-go (GNG) and the stop signal task (SST) with response recording based on the key-press method. However, the analysis of discrete variables (i.e., present or absent responses) registered by key-press could be insufficient to capture dynamic aspects of inhibitory control. Trying to overcome this limitation, in the present study we used a mouse tracking procedure to characterize movement profiles related to proactive and reactive inhibition. A total of fifty-three participants performed a cued GNG and an SST. The cued GNG mainly involves proactive control whereas the reactive component is mainly engaged in the SST. We evaluated the velocity profile from mouse trajectories both for responses obtained in the Go conditions and for inhibitory failures. Movements were classified as one-shot when no corrections were observed. Multi-peaked velocity profiles were classified as non-one-shot. A higher proportion of one-shot movements was found in the SST compared to the cued GNG when subjects failed to inhibit responses. This result suggests that proactive control may be responsible for unsmooth profiles in inhibition failures, supporting a differentiation between these tasks.

scholarly journals Is motor inhibition involved in the processing of sentential negation? An assessment via the Stop-Signal Task

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Montalti ◽  
Marta Calbi ◽  
Valentina Cuccio ◽  
Maria Alessandra Umiltà ◽  
Vittorio Gallese
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Good Tool ◽  
Scientific Debate ◽  
Sentential Negation ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Methodological Considerations

AbstractIn the last decades, the embodied approach to cognition and language gained momentum in the scientific debate, leading to evidence in different aspects of language processing. However, while the bodily grounding of concrete concepts seems to be relatively not controversial, abstract aspects, like the negation logical operator, are still today one of the main challenges for this research paradigm. In this framework, the present study has a twofold aim: (1) to assess whether mechanisms for motor inhibition underpin the processing of sentential negation, thus, providing evidence for a bodily grounding of this logic operator, (2) to determine whether the Stop-Signal Task, which has been used to investigate motor inhibition, could represent a good tool to explore this issue. Twenty-three participants were recruited in this experiment. Ten hand-action-related sentences, both in affirmative and negative polarity, were presented on a screen. Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible to the direction of the Go Stimulus (an arrow) and to withhold their response when they heard a sound following the arrow. This paradigm allows estimating the Stop Signal Reaction Time (SSRT), a covert reaction time underlying the inhibitory process. Our results show that the SSRT measured after reading negative sentences are longer than after reading affirmative ones, highlighting the recruitment of inhibitory mechanisms while processing negative sentences. Furthermore, our methodological considerations suggest that the Stop-Signal Task is a good paradigm to assess motor inhibition’s role in the processing of sentence negation.

scholarly journals Reconciling the influence of task-set switching and motor inhibition processes on stop signal after-effects

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquin A. Anguera ◽  
Kyle Lyman ◽  
Theodore P. Zanto ◽  
Jacob Bollinger ◽  
Adam Gazzaley
Keyword(s):  
Stop Signal ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Task Set ◽  
After Effects ◽  
Set Switching

scholarly journals Effects of beta- and gamma-band rhythmic stimulation on motor inhibition

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge Leunissen ◽  
Manon Van Steenkiste ◽  
Kirstin Heise ◽  
Thiago Santos Monteiro ◽  
Kyle Dunovan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gamma Oscillations ◽  
Gamma Band ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Gamma Activity ◽  
Oscillatory Activity ◽  
Beta Activity ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Beta Band ◽  
Beta Power ◽  
Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation

Voluntary movements are accompanied by an increase in gamma-band oscillatory activity (60-100Hz) and a strong desynchronization of beta-band activity (13-30Hz) in the motor system at both the cortical and subcortical level. Conversely, successful motor inhibition is associated with increased beta power in a fronto-basal-ganglia network. Intriguingly, gamma activity also increases in response to a stop-signal. In this study, we used transcranial alternating current stimulation to drive beta and gamma oscillations to investigate whether these frequencies are causally related to motor inhibition. We found that 20Hz stimulation targeted at the pre-supplementary motor area enhanced inhibition and increased beta oscillatory activity around the time of the stop-signal in trials directly following stimulation. In contrast, 70Hz stimulation seemed to slow down the braking process, and predominantly affected go task performance. These results demonstrate that the effects of tACS are state-dependent and that especially fronto-central beta activity is a functional marker for successful motor inhibition.

Impaired motor inhibition in adults who stutter – evidence from speech-free stop-signal reaction time tasks

2016 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 444-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Markett ◽  
Benjamin Bleek ◽  
Martin Reuter ◽  
Holger Prüss ◽  
Kirsten Richardt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Adults Who Stutter

scholarly journals Dynamical EEG Indices of Progressive Motor Inhibition and Error-Monitoring

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 478
Author(s):  
Trung Van Nguyen ◽  
Prasad Balachandran ◽  
Neil G. Muggleton ◽  
Wei-Kuang Liang ◽  
Chi-Hung Juan
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Control Process ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Error Processing ◽  
Alpha Power ◽  
Error Monitoring ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Hilbert Huang Transform ◽  
Time Frequency

Response inhibition has been widely explored using the stop signal paradigm in the laboratory setting. However, the mechanism that demarcates attentional capture from the motor inhibition process is still unclear. Error monitoring is also involved in the stop signal task. Error responses that do not complete, i.e., partial errors, may require different error monitoring mechanisms relative to an overt error. Thus, in this study, we included a “continue go” (Cont_Go) condition to the stop signal task to investigate the inhibitory control process. To establish the finer difference in error processing (partial vs. full unsuccessful stop (USST)), a grip-force device was used in tandem with electroencephalographic (EEG), and the time-frequency characteristics were computed with Hilbert–Huang transform (HHT). Relative to Cont_Go, HHT results reveal (1) an increased beta and low gamma power for successful stop trials, indicating an electrophysiological index of inhibitory control, (2) an enhanced theta and alpha power for full USST trials that may mirror error processing. Additionally, the higher theta and alpha power observed in partial over full USST trials around 100 ms before the response onset, indicating the early detection of error and the corresponding correction process. Together, this study extends our understanding of the finer motor inhibition control and its dynamic electrophysiological mechanisms.

P.1.i.027 The influence of cross-sex hormone therapy on motor inhibition measured with the stop signal task and 7Tesla fMRI

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S279
Author(s):  
M. Spies ◽  
G.S. Kranz ◽  
S. Ganger ◽  
R. Sladky ◽  
M. Küblböck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hormone Therapy ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Sex Hormone ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition

scholarly journals Inhibition of thoughts and actions in obsessive-compulsive disorder: extending the endophenotype?

2009 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Morein-Zamir ◽  
N. A. Fineberg ◽  
T. W. Robbins ◽  
B. J. Sahakian
Keyword(s):  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Motor Response ◽  
Thought Suppression ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Response Suppression ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Stimulus Meaning

BackgroundObsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has been associated with impairments in stop-signal inhibition, a measure of motor response suppression. The study used a novel paradigm to examine both thought suppression and response inhibition in OCD, where the modulatory effects of stimuli relevant to OCD could also be assessed. Additionally, the study compared inhibitory impairments in OCD patients with and without co-morbid depression, as depression is the major co-morbidity of OCD.MethodVolitional response suppression and unintentional thought suppression to emotive and neutral stimuli were examined using a novel thought stop-signal task. The thought stop-signal task was administered to non-depressed OCD patients, depressed OCD patients and healthy controls (n=20 per group).ResultsMotor inhibition impairments were evident in OCD patients, while motor response performance did not differ between patients and controls. Switching to a new response but not motor inhibition was affected by stimulus relevance in OCD patients. Additionally, unintentional thought suppression as measured by repetition priming was intact. OCD patients with and without depression did not differ on any task performance measures, though there were significant differences in all self-reported measures.ConclusionsResults support motor inhibition deficits in OCD that remain stable regardless of stimulus meaning or co-morbid depression. Only switching to a new response was influenced by stimulus meaning. When response inhibition was successful in OCD patients, so was the unintentional suppression of the accompanying thought.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document