Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Functional MRI Reveal Cortical and Subcortical Interactions during Stop-signal Response Inhibition

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bram B. Zandbelt ◽  
Mirjam Bloemendaal ◽  
Janna Marie Hoogendam ◽  
René S. Kahn ◽  
Matthijs Vink
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Functional Organization ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Motor Complex ◽  
Repetitive Tms ◽  
The Right

Stopping an action requires suppression of the primary motor cortex (M1). Inhibitory control over M1 relies on a network including the right inferior frontal cortex (rIFC) and the supplementary motor complex (SMC), but how these regions interact to exert inhibitory control over M1 is unknown. Specifically, the hierarchical position of the rIFC and SMC with respect to each other, the routes by which these regions control M1, and the causal involvement of these regions in proactive and reactive inhibition remain unclear. We used off-line repetitive TMS to perturb neural activity in the rIFC and SMC followed by fMRI to examine effects on activation in the networks involved in proactive and reactive inhibition, as assessed with a modified stop-signal task. We found repetitive TMS effects on reactive inhibition only. rIFC and SMC stimulation shortened the stop-signal RT (SSRT) and a shorter SSRT was associated with increased M1 deactivation. Furthermore, rIFC and SMC stimulation increased right striatal activation, implicating frontostriatal pathways in reactive inhibition. Finally, rIFC stimulation altered SMC activation, but SMC stimulation did not alter rIFC activation, indicating that rIFC lies upstream from SMC. These findings extend our knowledge about the functional organization of inhibitory control, an important component of executive functioning, showing that rIFC exerts reactive control over M1 via SMC and right striatum.

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Cai ◽  
Siyao Li ◽  
Jing Liu ◽  
Dawei Li ◽  
Zifang Feng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Causal Role ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
The Right

Mounting evidence suggests that response inhibition involves both proactive and reactive inhibitory control, yet its underlying neural mechanisms remain elusive. In particular, the roles of the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and inferior parietal lobe (IPL) in proactive and reactive inhibitory control are still under debate. This study aimed at examining the causal role of the right IFG and IPL in proactive and reactive inhibitory control, using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and the stop signal task. Twenty-two participants completed three sessions of the stop signal task, under anodal tDCS in the right IFG, the right IPL, or the primary visual cortex (VC; 1.5 mA for 15 min), respectively. The VC stimulation served as the active control condition. The tDCS effect for each condition was calculated as the difference between pre- and post-tDCS performance. Proactive control was indexed by the RT increase for go trials (or preparatory cost), and reactive control by the stop signal RT. Compared to the VC stimulation, anodal stimulation of the right IFG, but not that of the IPL, facilitated both proactive and reactive control. However, the facilitation of reactive control was not mediated by the facilitation of proactive control. Furthermore, tDCS did not affect the intraindividual variability in go RT. These results suggest a causal role of the right IFG, but not the right IPL, in both reactive and proactive inhibitory control.

scholarly journals S76. PROACTIVE AND REACTIVE RESPONSE INHIBITION IN INDIVIDUAL WITH SCHIZOTYPY: AN ERP STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S63-S63
Author(s):  
Ya Wang ◽  
Lu-xia Jia ◽  
Xiao-jing Qin ◽  
Jun-yan Ye ◽  
Raymond Chan
Keyword(s):  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Proactive Inhibition ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Present Event

Abstract Background Schizotypy, a subclinical group at risk for schizophrenia, have been found to show impairments in response inhibition. Recent studies differentiated proactive inhibition (a preparatory process before the stimuli appears) and reactive inhibition (the inhibition of a pre-potent or already initiated response). However, it remains unclear whether both proactive and reactive inhibition are impaired in schizotypy and what are the neural mechanisms. The present event-related potential study used an adapted stop-signal task to examine the two inhibition processes and the underlying neural mechanisms in schizotypy compared to healthy controls (HC). Methods A total of 21 individuals with schizotypy and 25 matched HC participated in this study. To explore different degrees of proactive inhibition, we set three conditions: a “certain” go condition which no stop signal occurred, a “17% no go” condition in which stop signal would appear in 17% of trials, and a “33% no go” condition in which stop signal would appear in 33% of trials. All participants completed all the conditions, and EEG was recorded when participants completed the task. Results Behavioral results showed that in both schizotypy and HC, the reaction times (RT) of go trials were significantly prolonged as the no go percentage increased, and HC showed significantly longer go RT compared with schizotypy in both “17% no go” and “33% no go” conditions, suggesting greater proactive inhibition in HC. Stop signal reaction times (SSRTs) in “33% no go” condition was shorter than “17% no go” condition in both groups. Schizotypy showed significantly longer SSRTs in both “17% no go” and “33% no go” conditions than HC, indicating schizotypy relied more on reactive inhibition. ERP results showed that schizotypy showed larger overall N1 for go trials than HC irrespective of condition, which may indicate a compensation process in schizotypy. Schizotypy showed smaller N2 on both successful and unsuccessful stop trials in “17% no go” conditions than HC, while no group difference was found in “33% no go” conditions for stop trials, which may indicate impaired error processing. Discussion These results suggested that schizotypy tended to be impaired in both proactive control and reactive control processes.

scholarly journals Decomposing Decision Components in the Stop-signal Task: A Model-based Approach to Individual Differences in Inhibitory Control

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1601-1614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey N. White ◽  
Eliza Congdon ◽  
Jeanette A. Mumford ◽  
Katherine H. Karlsgodt ◽  
Fred W. Sabb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Processing Speed ◽  
Execution Time ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Execution ◽  
Stimulus Processing ◽  
Model Based ◽  
The Right

The stop-signal task, in which participants must inhibit prepotent responses, has been used to identify neural systems that vary with individual differences in inhibitory control. To explore how these differences relate to other aspects of decision making, a drift-diffusion model of simple decisions was fitted to stop-signal task data from go trials to extract measures of caution, motor execution time, and stimulus processing speed for each of 123 participants. These values were used to probe fMRI data to explore individual differences in neural activation. Faster processing of the go stimulus correlated with greater activation in the right frontal pole for both go and stop trials. On stop trials, stimulus processing speed also correlated with regions implicated in inhibitory control, including the right inferior frontal gyrus, medial frontal gyrus, and BG. Individual differences in motor execution time correlated with activation of the right parietal cortex. These findings suggest a robust relationship between the speed of stimulus processing and inhibitory processing at the neural level. This model-based approach provides novel insight into the interrelationships among decision components involved in inhibitory control and raises interesting questions about strategic adjustments in performance and inhibitory deficits associated with psychopathology.

scholarly journals Establishing a Right Frontal Beta Signature for Stopping Action in Scalp EEG: Implications for Testing Inhibitory Control in Other Task Contexts

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Wagner ◽  
Jan R. Wessel ◽  
Ayda Ghahremani ◽  
Adam R. Aron
Keyword(s):  
Frontal Cortex ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Spectral Power ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Beta Band ◽  
Unexpected Events ◽  
Time Frequency ◽  
Inferior Frontal Cortex ◽  
The Right

Many studies have examined the rapid stopping of action as a proxy of human self-control. Several methods have shown that a critical focus for stopping is the right inferior frontal cortex. Moreover, electrocorticography studies have shown beta band power increases in the right inferior frontal cortex and in the BG for successful versus failed stop trials, before the time of stopping elapses, perhaps underpinning a prefrontal–BG network for inhibitory control. Here, we tested whether the same signature might be visible in scalp electroencephalography (EEG)—which would open important avenues for using this signature in studies of the recruitment and timing of prefrontal inhibitory control. We used independent component analysis and time–frequency approaches to analyze EEG from three different cohorts of healthy young volunteers (48 participants in total) performing versions of the standard stop signal task. We identified a spectral power increase in the band 13–20 Hz that occurs after the stop signal, but before the time of stopping elapses, with a right frontal topography in the EEG. This right frontal beta band increase was significantly larger for successful compared with failed stops in two of the three studies. We also tested the hypothesis that unexpected events recruit the same frontal system for stopping. Indeed, we show that the stopping-related right-lateralized frontal beta signature was also active after unexpected events (and we accordingly provide data and scripts for the method). These results validate a right frontal beta signature in the EEG as a temporally precise and functionally significant neural marker of the response inhibition process.

scholarly journals To Go or Not to Go: Degrees of Dynamic Inhibitory Control Revealed by the Function of Grip Force and Early Electrophysiological Indices

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trung Van Nguyen ◽  
Che-Yi Hsu ◽  
Satish Jaiswal ◽  
Neil G. Muggleton ◽  
Wei-Kuang Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Error Correction ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Primary Motor Cortex ◽  
Force Measurement ◽  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Source Analysis ◽  
Motor Inhibition

A critical issue in executive control is how the nervous system exerts flexibility to inhibit a prepotent response and adapt to sudden changes in the environment. In this study, force measurement was used to capture “partial” unsuccessful trials that are highly relevant in extending the current understanding of motor inhibition processing. Moreover, a modified version of the stop-signal task was used to control and eliminate potential attentional capture effects from the motor inhibition index. The results illustrate that the non-canceled force and force rate increased as a function of stop-signal delay (SSD), offering new objective indices for gauging the dynamic inhibitory process. Motor response (time and force) was a function of delay in the presentation of novel/infrequent stimuli. A larger lateralized readiness potential (LRP) amplitude in go and novel stimuli indicated an influence of the novel stimuli on central motor processing. Moreover, an early N1 component reflects an index of motor inhibition in addition to the N2 component reported in previous studies. Source analysis revealed that the activation of N2 originated from inhibitory control associated areas: the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG), pre-motor cortex, and primary motor cortex. Regarding partial responses, LRP and error-related negativity (ERNs) were associated with error correction processes, whereas the N2 component may indicate the functional overlap between inhibition and error correction. In sum, the present study has developed reliable and objective indices of motor inhibition by introducing force, force-rate and electrophysiological measures, further elucidating our understandings of dynamic motor inhibition and error correction.

scholarly journals Inhibitory Control on a Stop Signal Task in Tourette Syndrome before and after Deep Brain Stimulation of the Internal Segment of the Globus Pallidus

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 461
Author(s):  
Francesca Morreale ◽  
Zinovia Kefalopoulou ◽  
Ludvic Zrinzo ◽  
Patricia Limousin ◽  
Eileen Joyce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Brain Stimulation ◽  
Tourette Syndrome ◽  
Globus Pallidus ◽  
Brain Stimulation ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Deep Brain

As part of the first randomized double-blind trial of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the globus pallidus (GPi) in Tourette syndrome, we examined the effect of stimulation on response initiation and inhibition. A total of 14 patients with severe Tourette syndrome were recruited and tested on the stop signal task prior to and after GPi-DBS surgery and compared to eight age-matched healthy controls. Tics were significantly improved following GPi-DBS. The main measure of reactive inhibition, the stop signal reaction time did not change from before to after surgery and did not differ from that of healthy controls either before or after GPi-DBS surgery. This suggests that patients with Tourette syndrome have normal reactive inhibition which is not significantly altered by GPi-DBS.

scholarly journals Effect of obesity on inhibitory control in preadolescents during stop-signal task. An event-related potentials study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graciela C. Alatorre-Cruz ◽  
Heather Downs ◽  
Darcy Hagood ◽  
Seth T. Sorensen ◽  
D. Keith Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Related Potentials

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 Neurometabolic Correlates of Reactive and Proactive Motor Inhibition in Young and Older Adults: Evidence from Multiple Regional 1H-MR Spectroscopy

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akila Weerasekera ◽  
Oron Levin ◽  
Amanda Clauwaert ◽  
Kirstin-Friederike Heise ◽  
Lize Hermans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Proactive Inhibition ◽  
Older Age ◽  
Resonance Spectroscopy ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Age Related ◽  
The Right ◽  
Age Range

Abstract Suboptimal inhibitory control is a major factor contributing to motor/cognitive deficits in older age and pathology. Here, we provide novel insights into the neurochemical biomarkers of inhibitory control in healthy young and older adults and highlight putative neurometabolic correlates of deficient inhibitory functions in normal aging. Age-related alterations in levels of glutamate–glutamine complex (Glx), N-acetylaspartate (NAA), choline (Cho), and myo-inositol (mIns) were assessed in the right inferior frontal gyrus (RIFG), pre-supplementary motor area (preSMA), bilateral sensorimotor cortex (SM1), bilateral striatum (STR), and occipital cortex (OCC) with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS). Data were collected from 30 young (age range 18–34 years) and 29 older (age range 60–74 years) adults. Associations between age-related changes in the levels of these metabolites and performance measures or reactive/proactive inhibition were examined for each age group. Glx levels in the right striatum and preSMA were associated with more efficient proactive inhibition in young adults but were not predictive for reactive inhibition performance. Higher NAA/mIns ratios in the preSMA and RIFG and lower mIns levels in the OCC were associated with better deployment of proactive and reactive inhibition in older adults. Overall, these findings suggest that altered regional concentrations of NAA and mIns constitute potential biomarkers of suboptimal inhibitory control in aging.

Inhibitory Control is Slowed in Patients with Right Superior Medial Frontal Damage

2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 1843-1849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darlene Floden ◽  
Donald T. Stuss
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Inhibitory System ◽  
Frontal Lobe Lesions ◽  
Comprehensive Knowledge ◽  
Neural Underpinnings ◽  
Neurologically Normal ◽  
The Right ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Rule Out

Inhibitory control is an essential part of behavior. Comprehensive knowledge of the neural underpinnings will shed light on complex behavior, its breakdown in neurological and psychological disorders, and current and future techniques for the pharmacological or structural remediation of disinhibition. This study investigated the neural mechanisms involved in rapid response inhibition. The stop signal task was used to estimate inhibitory speed in a group of neurologically normal control subjects and patients with discrete frontal lobe lesions. Task procedures were controlled to rule out probable confounds related to strategic changes in task effort. The findings indicate that the frontal lobes are necessary for inhibitory control and, furthermore, that the integrity of the right superior medial frontal region is key for rapid inhibitory control under conditions controlling for strategically slow responses, forcing reliance more on a rapid, “kill-switch” inhibitory system. These results are interpreted within an anatomical framework of corticospinal motor control.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document