Discerning Mouse Trajectory Features With the Drift Diffusion Model

Unravelling the dynamics of response force: Investigating motor restraint and motor cancellation through go/no-go and stop-signal tasks

Prior research has found that the go/no-go (GNG) task primarily reflects participants' motor-restraint process, while the stop-signal task (SST) primarily represents participants' motor-cancellation process. However, traditional binary keyboards used in these experiments are unable to capture the subtleties of sub-threshold response-force dynamics. This has led to the neglect of potential sub-threshold motor-inhibition processes. In two experiments, we explored sub-threshold inhibition by using a custom force-sensitive keyboard to record response force in both GNG and SST. In experiment 1, participants displayed increased response force when correctly rejecting no-go targets in the GNG task compared to the baseline. In addition, they exhibited higher response force in hit trials than in false alarms, revealing engagement of both motor-restraint and motor-cancellation processes in GNG. Initially, participants utilised motor restraint, but if it failed to prevent inappropriate responses, they employed motor cancellation to stop responses before reaching the keypress threshold. In experiment 2, we used participants' average response-force amplitude and response-force latency in SST stop trials to characterise the motor-cancellation process. Average amplitude significantly predicted false-alarm rates in the GNG task, but the relationship between response latency and false-alarm rates was insignificant. We hypothesised that response latency reflects reactive inhibition control in motor cancellation, whereas average amplitude indicates proactive inhibition control. Our findings underscore the complexity of motor inhibition.

Hand Motions Reveal Attentional Status and Subliminal Semantic Processing: A Mouse-Tracking Technique

Theories of embodied cognition suggest that hand motions and cognition are closely interconnected. An emerging technique of tracking how participants move a computer mouse (i.e., the mouse-tracking technique) has shown advantages over the traditional response time measurement to detect implicit cognitive conflicts. Previous research suggests that attention is essential for subliminal processing to take place at a semantic level. However, this assumption is challenged by evidence showing the presence of subliminal semantic processing in the near-absence of attention. The inconsistency of evidence could stem from the insufficient sensitivity in the response time measurement. Therefore, we examined the role of attention in subliminal semantic processing by analyzing participants' hand motions using the mouse-tracking technique. The results suggest that subliminal semantic processing is not only enhanced by attention but also occurs when attention is disrupted, challenging the necessity of facilitated top-down attention for subliminal semantic processing, as claimed by a number of studies. In addition, by manipulating the color of attentional cues, our experiment shows that the cue color per se could influence participants' response patterns. Overall, the current study suggests that attentional status and subliminal semantic processing can be reliably revealed by temporal-spatial features extracted from cursor motion trajectories.