scholarly journals Uncontrolled Eating in Healthy Women Has Limited Influence on Food Reward Sensitivity and Food-Related Inhibitory Control

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maud Grol ◽  
Luis Cásedas ◽  
Danna Oomen ◽  
Desirée Spronk ◽  
Elaine Fox
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Food Reward ◽  
Reward Sensitivity ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
High Tendency ◽  
Healthy Women ◽  
Uncontrolled Eating

Uncontrolled eating—in the general population—is characterized by overeating, hedonic hunger and being drawn towards palatable foods. Theoretically, it is the result of a strong food reward signal in relation to a poor ability to exert inhibitory control. How food consumption influences inhibitory control and food reward sensitivity, and how this relates to the continued urge to eat, remains unclear though. We used fMRI (N=40) in order to investigate the neural mechanism underlying food reward sensitivity and food-specific response inhibition (go-nogo task), by comparing women reporting high versus low/average uncontrolled eating across two sessions: during an inter-meal hunger state and after consumption of a high-caloric snack. We found no effects of individual differences in uncontrolled eating, food consumption, nor their interaction on food reward sensitivity. Differences in uncontrolled eating and food consumption did interact in modulating activity in the left superior occipital gyrus during response inhibition of non-food stimuli, an area previously associated with successful nogo- vs. go-trials. Yet, behavioural performance on the go-nogo task was not modulated by uncontrolled eating nor food consumption. Women with a low/average tendency for uncontrolled eating may need more cognitive resources to support successful response inhibition of non-food stimuli during food ‘go’ blocks in an inter-meal hunger state, whereas women with a high tendency for uncontrolled eating showed this after food consumption. Considering current and previous findings, it seems that individual differences in uncontrolled eating in healthy women have only limited influence on food reward sensitivity and food-related inhibitory control, whereas differences in weight status (e.g., obesity) may have more impact.

scholarly journals Individual Differences in Inhibitory Control—Relationship Between Baseline Activation in Lateral PFC and an Electrophysiological Index of Response Inhibition

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 2430-2435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bastian Schiller ◽  
Lorena R.R. Gianotti ◽  
Kyle Nash ◽  
Daria Knoch
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition

Uncontrolled eating in healthy women has limited influence on food cue reactivity and food-related inhibitory control

Appetite ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 105767
Author(s):  
Maud Grol ◽  
Luis Cásedas ◽  
Danna Oomen ◽  
Desiree B. Spronk ◽  
Elaine Fox
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Cue Reactivity ◽  
Healthy Women ◽  
Uncontrolled Eating

Characterizing individual differences in reward sensitivity from the brain networks involved in response inhibition

NeuroImage ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 124 ◽  
pp. 287-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola Fuentes-Claramonte ◽  
César Ávila ◽  
Aina Rodríguez-Pujadas ◽  
Víctor Costumero ◽  
Noelia Ventura-Campos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Brain Networks ◽  
Reward Sensitivity ◽  
The Brain

scholarly journals Freedom makes you lose control

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 848-870 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Beuckels ◽  
Snezhanka Kazakova ◽  
Veroline Cauberghe ◽  
Liselot Hudders ◽  
Patrick De Pelsmacker
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Attention Allocation ◽  
Advertising Effectiveness ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Media Multitasking ◽  
Content Type

Purpose Past research suggests that heavy media multitaskers (HMMs) perform worse on tasks that require executive control, compared to light media multitaskers (LMMs). This paper aims to investigate whether individual differences between HMMs and LMMs make them respond differently to advertising in a media multitasking context and whether this stems from differences in the ability versus the motivation to regulate one’s attention. This is investigated by manipulating participants’ autonomy over attention allocation. Design/methodology/approach For the first study (n = 85), a between subjects design with three conditions was used: sequential, multitasking under low autonomy over attention allocation and multitasking under high autonomy over attention allocation. This study investigated the inhibitory control of HMMs vs LMMs in a very controlled multitasking setting. The second study (n = 91) replicated the design of study one in a more naturalistic media multitasking setting and investigated the driving role of motivation vs ability for cognitive load differences between HMMs and LMMs and the consequent impact on advertising effectiveness. Findings Study I suggests that HMMs perform worse on a response inhibition task than LMMs after multitasking freely (in which case motivation to regulate attention determines the process), but not after their attention was guided externally by the experimenter (in which case their motivation could no longer determine the process). Study II argues that when motivation to switch attention is at play, cognitive load differences occur between HMMs and LMMs. This study additionally reveals that under these circumstances, HMMs are more persuaded by advertisements (report higher purchase intentions) compared to LMMs, while no differences appear when only ability is at play. Research limitations/implications Executive control exists of different components (Miyake et al., 2000). The current study only focused on the impact of media multitasking frequency on response inhibition, but it would be interesting for future research to investigate whether media multitasking frequency equally affects the other sub-dimensions. Additionally, the impairment of response inhibition has been shown to predict a large number of other behavioral and impulse-control outcomes such as unhealthy food choices and alcohol and drug use (e.g. Friese et al., 2008). Future research should consider investigating other consequences of heavy media multitasking behavior, both advertising related and unrelated. Practical implications From a practical point of view, understanding the mechanisms that are driving the effects of media multitasking on advertising effectiveness for different groups of media-consumers could make it easier for practitioners to efficiently plan their media campaigns. Based on the findings of this study, the authors can derive that HMMs will be more depleted in cognitive resources and inhibitory control when media multitasking compared to LMMs. Consequently, this makes them more prone to advertising messages. This knowledge is of great importance for advertisers who could, based here on, aim to target HMMs more often than LMMs. Originality/value Two experimental studies by the authors confirm and add value to previous academic findings about the negative relation between media multitasking frequency and tasks that demand executive control. This study contributed to the previous by investigating whether individual differences between heavy and light media multitaskers make them respond differently toward advertising and whether the driving mechanism of these differences is a lack of motivation or ability to efficiently shift attention.

scholarly journals Cortical Silent Period reflects individual differences in action stopping performance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Paci ◽  
Giulio Di Cosmo ◽  
Francesca Ferri ◽  
Marcello Costantini
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Intracortical Inhibition ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Individual Response ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Cortical Silent Period ◽  
Interindividual Differences

AbstractInhibitory control is the ability to suppress inappropriate movements and unwanted actions, allowing to behave in a goal directed manner and to regulate impulses and responses. At the behavioral level, the ability to suppress unwanted actions can be measured via the Stop Signal Task, which allows estimating the temporal dynamics underlying successful response inhibition, namely the stop signal reaction time (SSRT). At the neural level, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) provides measures of electrophysiological markers of motor inhibition within the primary motor cortex (M1), such as the Cortical Silent period (CSP). Specifically, CSP’s length is a neurophysiological index of the levels of intracortical inhibition within M1, mainly mediated by slow GABAB receptors. Although there is strong evidence that intracortical inhibition varies during both action initiation and action stopping, it is still not clear whether interindividual differences in the neurophysiological markers of intracortical inhibition might contribute to behavioral differences in actual inhibitory control capacities. Hence, we here explored the relationship between individual differences in intracortical inhibition within M1 and behavioral response inhibition. The strength of GABABergic-mediated inhibition in M1 was determined by the length of individuals’ CSP, while the ability to suppress unwanted or inappropriate actions was assessed by the SSRT. We found a significant positive correlation between CSP’s length and SSRT, namely that individuals with greater levels of GABABergic-mediated inhibition within M1 seems to perform overall worse in inhibiting behavioral responses. These results support the assumption that individual differences in intracortical inhibition are mirrored by individual differences in action stopping abilities.New & NoteworthyThe present study corroborates the hypothesis that interindividual differences in neurophysiological TMS-derived biomarkers of intracortical inhibition provide a reliable methodology to investigate individual response inhibition capacities. To date, this is the first study to show that interindividual differences in the CSP’s length measured offline provide a viable biomarker of behavioral motor inhibition, and specifically that individuals with longer CSP performed worse at action stopping, compared to individuals with shorter CSP.

scholarly journals Effects of tDCS during inhibitory control training on performance and PTSD, aggression and anxiety symptoms: a randomized-controlled trial in a military sample

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Fenne M. Smits ◽  
Elbert Geuze ◽  
Dennis J. L. G. Schutter ◽  
Jack van Honk ◽  
Thomas E. Gladwin
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Anodal Tdcs ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Impulsive Aggression ◽  
The Right ◽  
Inhibition Training

Abstract Background Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and impulsive aggression are linked to transdiagnostic neurocognitive deficits. This includes impaired inhibitory control over inappropriate responses. Prior studies showed that inhibitory control can be improved by modulating the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in combination with inhibitory control training. However, its clinical potential remains unclear. We therefore aimed to replicate a tDCS-enhanced inhibitory control training in a clinical sample and test whether this reduces stress-related mental health symptoms. Methods In a preregistered double-blind randomized-controlled trial, 100 active-duty military personnel and post-active veterans with PTSD, anxiety, or impulsive aggression symptoms underwent a 5-session intervention where a stop-signal response inhibition training was combined with anodal tDCS over the right IFG for 20 min at 1.25 mA. Inhibitory control was evaluated with the emotional go/no-go task and implicit association test. Stress-related symptoms were assessed by self-report at baseline, post-intervention, and after 3-months and 1-year follow-ups. Results Active relative to sham tDCS neither influenced performance during inhibitory control training nor on assessment tasks, and did also not significantly influence self-reported symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, impulsive aggression, or depression at post-assessment or follow-up. Conclusions Our results do not support the idea that anodal tDCS over the right IFG at 1.25 mA enhances response inhibition training in a clinical sample, or that this tDCS-training combination can reduce stress-related symptoms. Applying different tDCS parameters or combining tDCS with more challenging tasks might provide better conditions to modulate cognitive functioning and stress-related symptoms.

scholarly journals Cortical silent period reflects individual differences in action stopping performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Paci ◽  
Giulio Di Cosmo ◽  
Mauro Gianni Perrucci ◽  
Francesca Ferri ◽  
Marcello Costantini
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Intracortical Inhibition ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Behavioral Differences ◽  
Cortical Silent Period ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time

AbstractInhibitory control is the ability to suppress inappropriate movements and unwanted actions, allowing to regulate impulses and responses. This ability can be measured via the Stop Signal Task, which provides a temporal index of response inhibition, namely the stop signal reaction time (SSRT). At the neural level, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) allows to investigate motor inhibition within the primary motor cortex (M1), such as the cortical silent period (CSP) which is an index of GABAB-mediated intracortical inhibition within M1. Although there is strong evidence that intracortical inhibition varies during action stopping, it is still not clear whether differences in the neurophysiological markers of intracortical inhibition contribute to behavioral differences in actual inhibitory capacities. Hence, here we explored the relationship between intracortical inhibition within M1 and behavioral response inhibition. GABABergic-mediated inhibition in M1 was determined by the duration of CSP, while behavioral inhibition was assessed by the SSRT. We found a significant positive correlation between CSP’s duration and SSRT, namely that individuals with greater levels of GABABergic-mediated inhibition seem to perform overall worse in inhibiting behavioral responses. These results support the assumption that individual differences in intracortical inhibition are mirrored by individual differences in action stopping abilities.

scholarly journals On the interrelation of 1/f neural noise and norepinephrine system activity during motor response inhibition

2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (5) ◽  
pp. 1633-1643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maik Pertermann ◽  
Moritz Mückschel ◽  
Nico Adelhöfer ◽  
Tjalf Ziemssen ◽  
Christian Beste
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Pupil Diameter ◽  
Human Information Processing ◽  
System Activity ◽  
Neural Noise ◽  
Control Processes ◽  
Norepinephrine System

Several lines of evidence suggest that there is a close interrelation between the degree of noise in neural circuits and the activity of the norepinephrine (NE) system, yet the precise nexus between these aspects is far from being understood during human information processing and cognitive control in particular. We examine this nexus during response inhibition in n = 47 healthy participants. Using high-density EEG recordings, we estimate neural noise by calculating “1/ f noise” of those data and integrate these EEG parameters with pupil diameter data as an established indirect index of NE system activity. We show that neural noise is reduced when cognitive control processes to inhibit a prepotent/automated response are exerted. These neural noise variations were confined to the theta frequency band, which has also been shown to play a central role during response inhibition and cognitive control. There were strong positive correlations between the 1 /f neural noise parameter and the pupil diameter data within the first 250 ms after the Nogo stimulus presentation at centro-parietal electrode sites. No such correlations were evident during automated responding on Go trials. Source localization analyses using standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography show that inferior parietal areas are activated in this time period in Nogo trials. The data suggest an interrelation of NE system activity and neural noise within early stages of information processing associated with inferior parietal areas when cognitive control processes are required. The data provide the first direct evidence for the nexus between NE system activity and the modulation of neural noise during inhibitory control in humans. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study showing that there is a nexus between norepinephrine system activity and the modulation of neural noise or scale-free neural activity during inhibitory control in humans. It does so by integrating pupil diameter data with analysis of EEG neural noise.

scholarly journals Beating uncontrolled eating: Training inhibitory control to reduce food intake and food cue sensitivity

Appetite ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 73-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danna Oomen ◽  
Maud Grol ◽  
Desiree Spronk ◽  
Charlotte Booth ◽  
Elaine Fox
Keyword(s):  
Food Intake ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Reduce Food Intake ◽  
Uncontrolled Eating
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document