Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 2/2015

01-03-2015 | Original Article

Voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation is associated with stopping success: evidence from LRP and lateralized mu ERD before the stop signal

Auteurs: Yao-Ting Ko, Shih-Kuen Cheng, Chi-Hung Juan

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2015

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

According to the race models of the stop-signal paradigm, stopping success (successful vs. unsuccessful stopping) is attributed to the finishing times of a go and a stop process. In addition to those factors involving processing times, in the present study we sought to use electrophysiological measures to find factors involving activations that could affect stopping success. We hypothesized that voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation would be a factor. To assess voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation in the stop-signal paradigm, we used a selective-stopping task without any precue. The selective-stopping task also allowed us to assess reaction times (RTs) even when stopping was successful. We demonstrated shorter RTs in signal-respond (i.e. unsuccessful stopping) than in signal-inhibit (successful stopping) trials, as is predicted by the race models. More importantly, we also demonstrated different pre-signal lateralized readiness potentials between the two types of trials and larger lateralized mu ERD in signal-respond than in signal-inhibit trials, suggesting that voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation affects stopping success. In addition to what is described in the race models of the stop-signal paradigm, the present results therefore demonstrated measures of pre-signal activations that could influence stopping success.
Voetnoten
1
In tasks without a precue, prestimulus LRPs most likely reflect the participant’s guessing about responding hand (e.g. Gratton et al., 1988). In contrast, in tasks with a precue which specifies which hand to respond (e.g. Jentzsch et al., 2004), prestimulus LRPs reflect the advance preparation based on the precue.
 
2
Ko & Miller, (2011) have described the difference between the selective-stopping task that is used to assess our ability to selectively inhibit a subset of concurrently activated response tendencies and the selective-stopping task that is about our ability to distinguish what stimulus is subject to be stopped.
 
3
In standard two-choice RT tasks (requiring either a left-hand or right-hand response) without any precue, the participant does not know which hand should be prepared to respond until the appearance of the imperative stimulus. By the same token, in the selective-stopping task without any precue indicating which hand may be stopped, the participant does not know which hand should be prepared to stop until the appearance of the stop signal. Therefore, like response preparation before the imperative stimulus in the standard two-choice RT task, response preparation before the stop signal in the selective-stopping task without any precue is response preparation voluntarily generated.
 
4
Specifically, for each participant and separately for signal-inhibit and signal-respond trials, the LRP was the average of the followings: for trials with the X shown on the left side, EEGs from the C4 site were subtracted from EEGs from the C3 site. For trials with the X shown on the right side, EEGs from the C3 site were subtracted from EEGs from the C4 site. Then the average of the LRP across all participants was obtained, separately for signal-inhibit and signal-respond trials.
 
5
Rejecting trials with blinks: for each trial, the difference between the maximum and the minimum values of vertical EOG, referred to here as peak-to-peak amplitude or PPA, was obtained from the interval between the trial onset (the presentation of the four outline squares) and the RT of that trial. For each participant, the distribution of PPA values from all trials was then obtained. Blinks were assumed to occur in trials with large and deviate PPA values, and those trials were therefore excluded. Rejecting trials with horizontal eye movements: for each trial, the maximum difference between the average of baseline horizontal EOG values and the horizontal EOG values from the interval between the trial onset and the RT of that trial, referred to here as maximum deviate from baseline or MDFB, was obtained. For each participant, the distribution of MDFB values from all trials was then obtained. Horizontal eye movements were assumed to occur in trials with large and deviate MDFB values, and those trials were therefore excluded. A description about the rationale of using PPA and MDFB can be found in Chapter 10 of Jeff Miller’s documentation named “ERP software documentation”. After the exclusions, the average and the minimum numbers of signal-inhibit trials across all participants were 37.4 (94.7 % of all signal-inhibit trials) and 23, respectively. The average and the minimum numbers of signal-respond trials across all participants were 36.6 (95.5 % of all signal-respond trials) and 15, respectively. The average and the minimum numbers of controlled-go trials across all participants were 72.4 (95.0 % of all controlled-go trials) and 46, respectively. The average and the minimum numbers of no-signal-go trials across all participants were 294 (95.0 % of all no-signal-go trials) and 198, respectively.
 
6
For signal-inhibit and signal-respond trials (i.e. stop-signal trials), the nontarget hand was the hand not-to-be-stopped (i.e. the hand on the contralateral side of the X indicating stopping); for controlled-go trials, the nontarget hand referred to the hand on the contralateral side of the X used to control for the mere presence of the stop signal.
 
7
The same pattern of results (i.e. different pre-signal LRPs in signal-inhibit and signal-respond trials) was found when the time interval between 500 and 200 ms before the stop-signal onset was assessed [F(1,16) = 6.46, p < .05]; whereas there was no difference between the two types of trials in the time interval between 1,000 and 500 ms before the stop-signal onset [F(1,16) = 2.94, p > .1].
 
8
We thank Hartmut Leuthold for pointing out this possibility.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Adrian, E. D. (1936). The electrical activity of the cortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, XXIX, 197–200. Adrian, E. D. (1936). The electrical activity of the cortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, XXIX, 197–200.
go back to reference Andres, P. (2003). Frontal cortex as the central executive of working memory: time to revise our view. Cortex, 39, 871–895.CrossRefPubMed Andres, P. (2003). Frontal cortex as the central executive of working memory: time to revise our view. Cortex, 39, 871–895.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Aron, A. R., & Verbruggen, F. (2008). Stop the presses: dissociating a selective from a global mechanism for stopping. Psychological Science, 19, 1146–1153.CrossRefPubMed Aron, A. R., & Verbruggen, F. (2008). Stop the presses: dissociating a selective from a global mechanism for stopping. Psychological Science, 19, 1146–1153.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Boucher, L., Palmeri, T. J., Logan, G. D., & Schall, J. D. (2007). Inhibitory control in mind and brain: an interactive race model of countermanding saccades. Psychological Review, 114, 376–397.CrossRefPubMed Boucher, L., Palmeri, T. J., Logan, G. D., & Schall, J. D. (2007). Inhibitory control in mind and brain: an interactive race model of countermanding saccades. Psychological Review, 114, 376–397.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Cai, W., Oldenkamp, C. L., & Aron, A. R. (2011). A proactive mechanism for selective suppression of response tendencies. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 5965–5969.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Cai, W., Oldenkamp, C. L., & Aron, A. R. (2011). A proactive mechanism for selective suppression of response tendencies. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 5965–5969.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Chatrian, G. E., Petersen, M. C., & Lazarte, J. A. (1959). The blocking of the Rolandic wicket rhythm and some central changes related to movement. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 11, 497–510.CrossRefPubMed Chatrian, G. E., Petersen, M. C., & Lazarte, J. A. (1959). The blocking of the Rolandic wicket rhythm and some central changes related to movement. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 11, 497–510.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Claffey, M. P., Sheldon, S., Stinear, C. M., Verbruggen, F., & Aron, A. R. (2010). Having a goal to stop action is associated with advance control of specific motor representations. Neuropsychologia, 48, 541–548.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Claffey, M. P., Sheldon, S., Stinear, C. M., Verbruggen, F., & Aron, A. R. (2010). Having a goal to stop action is associated with advance control of specific motor representations. Neuropsychologia, 48, 541–548.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Coles, M. G. H. (1989). Modern mind-brain reading: psychophysiology, physiology and cognition. Psychophysiology, 26, 251–269.CrossRefPubMed Coles, M. G. H. (1989). Modern mind-brain reading: psychophysiology, physiology and cognition. Psychophysiology, 26, 251–269.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Coxon, J. P., Stinear, C.M., & Byblow, W. D. (2007). Selective inhibition of movement. Journal of Neurophysiology, 97, 2480–2489. Coxon, J. P., Stinear, C.M., & Byblow, W. D. (2007). Selective inhibition of movement. Journal of Neurophysiology, 97, 2480–2489.
go back to reference De Jong, R., Coles, M. G. H., & Logan, G. D. (1995). Strategies and mechanisms in non-selective and selective inhibitory motor control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 498–511. De Jong, R., Coles, M. G. H., & Logan, G. D. (1995). Strategies and mechanisms in non-selective and selective inhibitory motor control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 498–511.
go back to reference De Jong, R., Gladwin, T. E., & Hart, B. M. (2006). Movement-related EEG indices of preparation in task switching and motor control. Brain Research, 1105, 73–82.CrossRefPubMed De Jong, R., Gladwin, T. E., & Hart, B. M. (2006). Movement-related EEG indices of preparation in task switching and motor control. Brain Research, 1105, 73–82.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Deiber, M.-P., Sallard, E., Ludwig, C., Ghezzi, C., Barral, J., & Ibanez, V. (2012). EEG alpha activity reflects motor preparation rather than the mode of action selection. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 6, 1–11.CrossRef Deiber, M.-P., Sallard, E., Ludwig, C., Ghezzi, C., Barral, J., & Ibanez, V. (2012). EEG alpha activity reflects motor preparation rather than the mode of action selection. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 6, 1–11.CrossRef
go back to reference Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9–21.CrossRefPubMed Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9–21.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Doyle, L. M. F., Yarrow, K., & Brown, P. (2005). Lateralization of event-related beta desynchronization in the EEG during pre-cued reaction time tasks. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116, 1879–1888.CrossRefPubMed Doyle, L. M. F., Yarrow, K., & Brown, P. (2005). Lateralization of event-related beta desynchronization in the EEG during pre-cued reaction time tasks. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116, 1879–1888.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.CrossRef Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.CrossRef
go back to reference Gastaut, H., Naquet, R., & Gastaut, Y. (1965). A study of the mu rhythm in subjects lacking one or more limbs. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 18, 720–721.CrossRef Gastaut, H., Naquet, R., & Gastaut, Y. (1965). A study of the mu rhythm in subjects lacking one or more limbs. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 18, 720–721.CrossRef
go back to reference Gladwin, T. E., Hart, B. M., & De Jong, R. (2008). Dissociations between motor-related EEG measures in a cued movement sequence task. Cortex, 44, 521–536.CrossRefPubMed Gladwin, T. E., Hart, B. M., & De Jong, R. (2008). Dissociations between motor-related EEG measures in a cued movement sequence task. Cortex, 44, 521–536.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Gratton, G. G., Coles, M. G. H., Sirevaag, E. J., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1988). Pre- and post-stimulus activation of response channels: a psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 331–344.PubMed Gratton, G. G., Coles, M. G. H., Sirevaag, E. J., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1988). Pre- and post-stimulus activation of response channels: a psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 331–344.PubMed
go back to reference Jasper, H., & Andrews, H. (1938). Electro-encephalography III: normal differentiation of occipital and precentral regions in man. Arch NeurPsych, 39(1), 96.CrossRef Jasper, H., & Andrews, H. (1938). Electro-encephalography III: normal differentiation of occipital and precentral regions in man. Arch NeurPsych, 39(1), 96.CrossRef
go back to reference Jentzsch, I., Leuthold, H., Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2004). Beneficial effects of ambiguous precues: parallel motor preparation or reduced premotoric processing time? Psychophysiology, 41, 231–244. Jentzsch, I., Leuthold, H., Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2004). Beneficial effects of ambiguous precues: parallel motor preparation or reduced premotoric processing time? Psychophysiology, 41, 231–244.
go back to reference Ko, Y.-T., Alsford, T., & Miller, J. (2012). Inhibitory effects on response force in the stop-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 465–477.PubMed Ko, Y.-T., Alsford, T., & Miller, J. (2012). Inhibitory effects on response force in the stop-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 465–477.PubMed
go back to reference Ko, Y.-T., & Miller, J. (2011). Nonselective motor-level changes associated with selective response inhibition: evidence from response force measurements. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18, 813–819.CrossRefPubMed Ko, Y.-T., & Miller, J. (2011). Nonselective motor-level changes associated with selective response inhibition: evidence from response force measurements. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18, 813–819.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ko, Y.-T., & Miller, J. (2013). Signal-related contributions to stopping-interference effects in selective response inhibition. Experimental Brain Research, 228, 205–212.CrossRefPubMed Ko, Y.-T., & Miller, J. (2013). Signal-related contributions to stopping-interference effects in selective response inhibition. Experimental Brain Research, 228, 205–212.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Logan, G. D., & Cowan, W. B. (1984). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91, 295–327.CrossRef Logan, G. D., & Cowan, W. B. (1984). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91, 295–327.CrossRef
go back to reference Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.CrossRefPubMed Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Mordkoff, J. T., & Grosjean, M. (2001). The lateralized readiness potential and response kinetics in response-time tasks. Psychophysiology, 38, 777–786.CrossRefPubMed Mordkoff, J. T., & Grosjean, M. (2001). The lateralized readiness potential and response kinetics in response-time tasks. Psychophysiology, 38, 777–786.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfurtscheller, G. (1992). Event-related synchronization (ERS): an electrophysiological correlate of cortical areas at rest. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 83, 62–69.CrossRefPubMed Pfurtscheller, G. (1992). Event-related synchronization (ERS): an electrophysiological correlate of cortical areas at rest. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 83, 62–69.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfurtscheller, G., & Aranibar, A. (1977). Event-related cortical desynchronization detected by power measurements of scalp EEG. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 42, 817–826.CrossRefPubMed Pfurtscheller, G., & Aranibar, A. (1977). Event-related cortical desynchronization detected by power measurements of scalp EEG. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 42, 817–826.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfurtscheller, G., & Aranibar, A. (1979). Evaluation of event-related desynchronization (ERD) preceding and following voluntary self-paced movement. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 46, 138–146.CrossRefPubMed Pfurtscheller, G., & Aranibar, A. (1979). Evaluation of event-related desynchronization (ERD) preceding and following voluntary self-paced movement. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 46, 138–146.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Pfurtscheller, G., & Berghold, A. (1989). Patterns of cortical activation during planning of voluntary movement. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 72, 250–258.CrossRefPubMed Pfurtscheller, G., & Berghold, A. (1989). Patterns of cortical activation during planning of voluntary movement. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 72, 250–258.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Toro, C., Deuschl, G., Thatcher, R., Sato, S., Kufta, C., & Hallett, M. (1994). Event-related desynchronization and movement-related cortical potentials on the ECoG and EEG. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 93, 380–389.CrossRefPubMed Toro, C., Deuschl, G., Thatcher, R., Sato, S., Kufta, C., & Hallett, M. (1994). Event-related desynchronization and movement-related cortical potentials on the ECoG and EEG. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol, 93, 380–389.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Van Boxtel, G. J. M., van der Molen, M. W., Jennings, J. R., & Brunia, C. H. M. (2001). A psychophysiological analysis of inhibitory motor control in the stop-signal paradigm. Biological Psychology, 58, 229–262.CrossRefPubMed Van Boxtel, G. J. M., van der Molen, M. W., Jennings, J. R., & Brunia, C. H. M. (2001). A psychophysiological analysis of inhibitory motor control in the stop-signal paradigm. Biological Psychology, 58, 229–262.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., van der Molen, M. W., & Logan, G. D. (2002). Reduced response readiness delays stop-signal inhibition. Acta Psychologica, 111, 155–169. van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., van der Molen, M. W., & Logan, G. D. (2002). Reduced response readiness delays stop-signal inhibition. Acta Psychologica, 111, 155–169.
go back to reference Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2009a). Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 647–661.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2009a). Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 647–661.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
go back to reference Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2009b). Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 835–854.PubMedCentralPubMed Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D. (2009b). Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 835–854.PubMedCentralPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation is associated with stopping success: evidence from LRP and lateralized mu ERD before the stop signal
Auteurs
Yao-Ting Ko
Shih-Kuen Cheng
Chi-Hung Juan
Publicatiedatum
01-03-2015
Uitgeverij
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0567-3

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2015

Psychological Research 2/2015 Naar de uitgave