Response inhibition activates distinct motor cortical inhibitory processes

Neurogenetic underpinnings of nicotine use severity: Integrating the brain transcriptomes and GWAS variants via network approaches

Our study focused on human brain transcriptomes and the genetic risks of cigarettes per day (CPD) to investigate the neurogenetic mechanisms of individual variation in nicotine use severity. We constructed whole-brain and intramodular region-specific coexpression networks using BrainSpan's transcriptomes, and the genomewide association studies identified risk variants of CPD, confirmed the associations between CPD and each gene set in the region-specific subnetworks using an independent dataset, and conducted bioinformatic analyses. Eight brain-region-specific coexpression subnetworks were identified in association with CPD: amygdala, hippocampus, medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), orbitofrontal cortex (OPFC), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, striatum, mediodorsal nucleus of the thalamus (MDTHAL), and primary motor cortex (M1C). Each gene set in the eight subnetworks was associated with CPD. We also identified three hub proteins encoded by GRIN2A in the amygdala, PMCA2 in the hippocampus, MPFC, OPFC, striatum, and MDTHAL, and SV2B in M1C. Intriguingly, the pancreatic secretion pathway appeared in all the significant protein interaction subnetworks, suggesting pleiotropic effects between cigarette smoking and pancreatic diseases. The three hub proteins and genes are implicated in stress response, drug memory, calcium homeostasis, and inhibitory control. These findings provide novel evidence of the neurogenetic underpinnings of smoking severity.

Corticospinal excitability reductions during action preparation and action stopping in humans: Different sides of the same inhibitory coin?

Motor functions and cognitive processes are closely associated with each other. In humans, this linkage is reflected in motor system state changes both when an action must be prepared and stopped. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation showed that both action preparation and action stopping are accompanied by a reduction of corticospinal excitability, referred to as preparatory and response inhibition, respectively. While previous efforts have been made to describe both phenomena extensively, an updated and comprehensive comparison of the two phenomena is lacking. To ameliorate such deficit, this review focuses on the role and interpretation of single-coil (single-pulse and paired-pulse) and dual-coil TMS outcome measures during action preparation and action stopping in humans. To that effect, it aims to identify commonalities and differences, detailing how TMS-based outcome measures are affected by states, traits, and psychopathologies in both processes. Eventually, findings will be compared, and open questions will be addressed to aid future research.

Proactive cues facilitate faster action reprogramming, but not stopping, in a response-selective stop signal task

The ability to stop simple ongoing actions has been extensively studied using the stop signal task, but less is known about inhibition in more complex scenarios. Here we used a task requiring bimanual responses to go stimuli, but selective inhibition of only one of those responses following a stop signal. We assessed how proactive cues affect the nature of both the responding and stopping processes, and the well-documented stopping delay (interference effect) in the continuing action following successful stopping. In this task, estimates of the speed of inhibition based on a simple-stopping model are inappropriate, and have produced inconsistent findings about the effects of proactive control on motor inhibition. We instead used a multi-modal approach, based on improved methods of detecting and interpreting partial electromyographical responses and the recently proposed SIS (simultaneously inhibit and start) model of selective stopping behaviour. Our results provide clear and converging evidence that proactive cues reduce the stopping delay effect by slowing bimanual responses and speeding unimanual responses, with a negligible effect on the speed of the stopping process.

Restart errors reaction time of a two-step inhibition process account for the violation of the race model's independence in multi-effector selective stop signal task

Goal-oriented actions often require the coordinated movement of two or more effectors. Sometimes multi-effector movements need to be adjusted according to a continuously changing environment, requiring stopping an effector without interrupting the movement of the others. This form of control has been investigated by the selective Stop Signal Task (SST), requiring the inhibition of an effector of a multicomponent action. This form of selective inhibition has been hypothesized to act through a two-step process, where a temporary global inhibition deactivating all the ongoing motor responses is followed by a restarting process that reactivates only the moving effector. When this form of inhibition takes place, the reaction time (RT) of the moving effector pays the cost of the previous global inhibition. However, it is poorly investigated if and how this cost delays the RT of the effector that was required to be stopped but was erroneously moved (Stop Error trials). Here we measure the Stop Error RT in a group of participants instructed to simultaneously rotate the wrist and lift the foot when a Go Signal occurred, and interrupt both movements (non-selective Stop version) or only one of them (selective Stop version) when a Stop Signal was presented. We presented this task in two experimental conditions to evaluate how different contexts can influence a possible proactive inhibition on the RT of the moving effector in the selective Stop versions. In one context, we provided the foreknowledge of the effector to be inhibited by presenting the same selective or non-selective Stop versions in the same block of trials. In a different context, while providing no foreknowledge of the effector(s) to be stopped, the selective and non-selective Stop versions were intermingled, and the information on the effector to be stopped was delivered at the time of the Stop Signal presentation. We detected a cost in both Correct and Error selective Stop RTs that was influenced by the different task conditions. Results are discussed within the framework of the race model related to the SST, and its relationship with a restart model developed for selective versions of this paradigm.

Proactive Interhemispheric Disinhibition Supports Response Preparation during Selective Stopping

Response inhibition is essential for terminating inappropriate actions. A substantial response delay may occur in the nonstopped effector when only part of a multieffector action is terminated. This stopping-interference effect has been attributed to nonselective response inhibition processes and can be reduced with proactive cuing. This study aimed to elucidate the role of interhemispheric primary motor cortex (M1-M1) influences during selective stopping with proactive cuing. We hypothesized that stopping-interference would be reduced as stopping certainty increased because of proactive recruitment of interhemispheric facilitation or inhibition when cued to respond or stop, respectively. Twenty-three healthy human participants of either sex performed a bimanual anticipatory response inhibition paradigm with cues signaling the likelihood of a stop-signal occurring. Dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to determine corticomotor excitability (CME), interhemispheric inhibition (IHI), and interhemispheric facilitation (IHF) in the left hand at rest and during response preparation. Response times slowed and stopping-interference decreased with increased stopping certainty. Proactive response inhibition was marked by a reduced rate of rise and faster cancel time in electromyographical bursts during stopping. There was a nonselective release of IHI but not CME from rest to in-task response preparation, whereas IHF was not observed in either context. An effector-specific reduction in CME but no reinstatement of IHI was observed when the left hand was cued to stop. These findings indicate that stopping speed and selectivity are better with proactive cueing and that interhemispheric M1-M1 channels modulate inhibitory tone during response preparation to support going but not proactive response inhibition.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Response inhibition is essential for terminating inappropriate actions and, in some cases, may be required for only part of a multieffector action. The present study examined interhemispheric influences between the primary motor cortices during selective stopping with proactive cuing. Stopping selectivity was greater with increased stopping certainty and was marked by proactive adjustments to the hand cued to stop and hand cued to respond separately. Inhibitory interhemispheric influences were released during response preparation but were not directly involved in proactive response inhibition. These findings indicate that between-hand stopping can be selective with proactive cuing, but cue-related improvements are unlikely to reflect the advance engagement of interhemispheric influences between primary motor cortices.

Comparing anticipatory and stop-signal response inhibition with a novel, open-source selective stopping toolbox

Response inhibition is essential for terminating inappropriate actions and, in some cases, may be required selectively. Selective stopping can be investigated with multicomponent anticipatory or stop-signal response inhibition paradigms. Here we provide a freely available open-source Selective Stopping Toolbox (SeleST) to investigate selective stopping using either anticipatory or stop-signal task variants. This study aimed to evaluate selective stopping between the anticipatory and stop-signal variants using SeleST and provide guidance to researchers for future use. Forty healthy human participants performed bimanual anticipatory response inhibition and stop-signal tasks in SeleST. Responses were more variable and slowed to a greater extent during the stop-signal than in the anticipatory paradigm. However, the stop-signal paradigm better conformed to the assumption of the independent race model of response inhibition. The expected response delay during selective stop trials was present in both variants. These findings indicate that selective stopping can successfully be investigated with either anticipatory or stop-signal paradigms in SeleST. We propose that the anticipatory paradigm should be used when strict control of response times is desired, while the stop-signal paradigm should be used when it is desired to estimate stop-signal reaction time with the independent race model. Importantly, the dual functionality of SeleST allows researchers flexibility in paradigm selection when investigating selective stopping.

Investigating the role of contextual cues and interhemispheric inhibitory mechanisms in response-selective stopping: a TMS study

Response-selective stopping requires cancellation of only one component of a multicomponent action. While research has investigated how delays to the continuing action components ("stopping interference") can be attenuated by way of contextual cues of the specific stopping demands ("foreknowledge"), little is known of the underlying neural mechanisms. Twenty-seven, healthy, young adults undertook a multicomponent stop-signal task. For two thirds of trials, participants responded to an imperative (go) stimulus (IS) with simultaneous button presses using their left and right index fingers. For the remaining one third of trials, the IS was followed by a stop-signal requiring cancellation of only the left, or right, response. To manipulate foreknowledge of stopping demands, a cue preceded the IS that informed participants which hand might be required to stop (proactive) or provided no such information (reactive). Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) assessed corticospinal excitability (CSE) as well as short- and long-interval interhemispheric inhibition (SIHI, LIHI) between the primary motor cortices. Proactive cues reduced, but did not eliminate, stopping interference relative to the reactive condition. Relative to TMS measures at cue onset, decreases in CSE (both hands and both cue conditions) and LIHI (both hands, proactive condition only) were observed during movement preparation. During movement cancellation, LIHI reduction in the continuing hand was greater than that in the stopping hand and greater than LIHI reductions in both hands during execution of multicomponent responses. Our results indicate that foreknowledge attenuates stopping interference and provide evidence for a novel role of LIHI, mediated via prefrontal regions, in facilitating continuing action components.

Nonequivalent After-Effects of Alternating Current Stimulation on Motor Cortex Oscillation and Inhibition: Simulation and Experimental Study

The effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) frequency on brain oscillations and cortical excitability are still controversial. Therefore, this study investigated how different tACS frequencies differentially modulate cortical oscillation and inhibition. To do so, we first determined the optimal positioning of tACS electrodes through an electric field simulation constructed from magnetic resonance images. Seven electrode configurations were tested on the electric field of the precentral gyrus (hand motor area). We determined that the Cz-CP1 configuration was optimal, as it resulted in higher electric field values and minimized the intra-individual differences in the electric field. Therefore, tACS was delivered to the hand motor area through this arrangement at a fixed frequency of 10 Hz (alpha-tACS) or 20 Hz (beta-tACS) with a peak-to-peak amplitude of 0.6 mA for 20 min. We found that alpha- and beta-tACS resulted in larger alpha and beta oscillations, respectively, compared with the oscillations observed after sham-tACS. In addition, alpha- and beta-tACS decreased the amplitudes of conditioned motor evoked potentials and increased alpha and beta activity, respectively. Correspondingly, alpha- and beta-tACSs enhanced cortical inhibition. These results show that tACS frequency differentially affects motor cortex oscillation and inhibition.

Decoupling countermands nonselective response inhibition during selective stopping

Response inhibition is essential for goal-directed behavior within dynamic environments. Selective stopping is a complex form of response inhibition where only part of a multi-effector response must be cancelled. A substantial response delay emerges on unstopped effectors when a cued effector is successfully stopped. This stopping-interference effect is indicative of nonselective response inhibition during selective stopping which may, in-part, be a consequence of functional coupling. The present study examined selective stopping of (de)coupled bimanual responses in healthy human participants of either sex. Participants performed synchronous and asynchronous versions of an anticipatory stop-signal paradigm across two sessions while mu (µ) and beta (β) rhythm were measured with electroencephalography. Results showed that responses were behaviorally decoupled during asynchronous go trials and the extent of response asynchrony was associated with lateralized sensorimotor µ and β desynchronization during response preparation. Selective stopping produced a stopping-interference effect and was marked by a nonselective increase and subsequent rebound in prefrontal and sensorimotor β. In support of the coupling account, stopping-interference was smaller during selective stopping of asynchronous responses, and negatively associated with the magnitude of decoupling. However, the increase in sensorimotor β during selective stopping was equivalent between the stopped and unstopped hand irrespective of response synchrony. Overall, the findings demonstrate that decoupling facilitates selective stopping after a global pause process and emphasizes the importance of considering the influence of both the go and stop context when investigating response inhibition.

Intact Proactive Motor Inhibition after Unilateral Prefrontal Cortex or Basal Ganglia Lesions

Previous research provided evidence for the critical importance of the PFC and BG for reactive motor inhibition, that is, when actions are cancelled in response to external signals. Less is known about the role of the PFC and BG in proactive motor inhibition, referring to preparation for an upcoming stop signal. In this study, patients with unilateral lesions to the BG or lateral PFC performed in a cued go/no-go task, whereas their EEG was recorded. The paradigm called for cue-based preparation for upcoming, lateralized no-go signals. Based on previous findings, we focused on EEG indices of cognitive control (prefrontal beta), motor preparation (sensorimotor mu/beta, contingent negative variation [CNV]), and preparatory attention (occipital alpha, CNV). On a behavioral level, no differences between patients and controls were found, suggesting an intact ability to proactively prepare for motor inhibition. Patients showed an altered preparatory CNV effect, but no other differences in electrophysiological activity related to proactive and reactive motor inhibition. Our results suggest a context-dependent role of BG and PFC structures in motor inhibition, being critical in reactive, unpredictable contexts, but less so in situations where one can prepare for stopping on a short timescale.

Paired-pulse TMS and scalp EEG reveal systematic relationship between inhibitory GABAa signaling in M1 and fronto-central cortical activity during action stopping

By stopping actions even after their initiation, humans can flexibly adapt ongoing behavior to changing circumstances. The neural processes underlying the inhibition of movement during action stopping are still controversial. In the 90s, a fronto-central event-related potential (ERP) was discovered in the human EEG response to stop signals in the classic stop-signal task, alongside a proposal that this "stop-signal P3" reflects an inhibitory process. Indeed, both amplitude and onset of the stop-signal P3 relate to overt behavior and movement-related EEG activity in ways predicted by the dominant models of action-stopping. However, neither EEG nor behavior allow direct inferences about the presence or absence of neurophysiological inhibition of the motor cortex, making it impossible to definitively relate the stop-signal P3 to inhibition. Here, we therefore present a multimethod investigation of the relationship between the stop-signal P3 and GABAergic signaling in primary motor cortex, as indexed by paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). In detail, we measured short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), a marker of inhibitory GABA_a activity in M1, in a group of 41 human participants who also performed the stop-signal task while undergoing EEG recordings. In line with the P3-inhibition hypothesis, we found that subjects with stronger inhibitory GABA activity in M1 also showed both faster onsets and larger amplitudes of the stop-signal P3. This provides direct evidence linking the properties of this ERP to a true physiological index of motor system inhibition. We discuss these findings in the context of recent theoretical developments and empirical findings regarding the neural implementation of motor inhibition.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The neural mechanisms underlying rapid action stopping in humans are subject to intense debate, in part because recordings of neural signals purportedly reflecting inhibitory motor control are hard to directly relate to the true, physiological inhibition of motor cortex. For the first time, the current study combines EEG and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) methods to demonstrate a direct correspondence between fronto-central control-related EEG activity following signals to cancel an action and the physiological inhibition of primary motor cortex.

Stop Signal Task Training Strengthens GABA-mediated Neurotransmission within the Primary Motor Cortex

We have recently shown that the efficiency in stopping a response, measured using the stop signal task, is related to GABAA-mediated short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) in the primary motor cortex. In this study, we conducted two experiments on humans to determine whether training participants in the stop signal task within one session (Experiment 1) and across multiple sessions (Experiment 2) would increase SICI strength. For each experiment, we obtained premeasures and postmeasures of stopping efficiency and resting-state SICI, that is, during relaxed muscle activity (Experiment 1, n = 45, 15 male participants) and SICI during the stop signal task (Experiment 2, n = 44, 21 male participants). In the middle blocks of Experiment 1 and the middle sessions of Experiment 2, participants in the experimental group completed stop signal task training, whereas control participants completed a similar task without the requirement to stop a response. After training, the experimental group showed increased resting-state SICI strength (Experiment 1) and increased SICI strength during the stop signal task (Experiment 2). Although there were no overall behavioral improvements in stopping efficiency, improvements at an individual level were correlated with increases in SICI strength at rest (Experiment 1) and during successful stopping (Experiment 2). These results provide evidence of neuroplasticity in resting-state and task-related GABAA-mediated SICI in the primary motor cortex after response inhibition training. These results also suggest that SICI and stopping efficiency are temporally linked, such that a change in SICI between time points is correlated with a change in stopping efficiency between time points.

A Single Mechanism for Global and Selective Response Inhibition under the Influence of Motor Preparation

In our everyday behavior, we frequently cancel one movement while continuing others. Two competing models have been suggested for the cancellation of such specific actions: (1) the abrupt engagement of a unitary global inhibitory mechanism followed by reinitiation of the continuing actions; or (2) a balance between distinct global and selective inhibitory mechanisms. To evaluate these models, we examined behavioral and physiological markers of proactive control, motor preparation, and response inhibition using a combination of behavioral task performance measures, electromyography, electroencephalography, and motor evoked potentials elicited with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Healthy human participants of either sex performed two versions of a stop signal task with cues incorporating proactive control: a unimanual task involving the initiation and inhibition of a single response, and a bimanual task involving the selective stopping of one of two prepared responses. Stopping latencies, motor evoked potentials, and frontal β power (13-20 Hz) did not differ between the unimanual and bimanual tasks. However, evidence for selective proactive control before stopping was manifest in the bimanual condition as changes in corticomotor excitability, μ (9-14 Hz), and β (15-25 Hz) oscillations over sensorimotor cortex. Together, our results favor the recruitment of a single inhibitory stopping mechanism with the net behavioral output depending on the levels of action-specific motor preparation.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Response inhibition is a core function of cognitive flexibility and movement control. Previous research has suggested separate mechanisms for selective and global inhibition, yet the evidence is inconclusive. Another line of research has examined the influence of preparation for action stopping, or what is called proactive control, on stopping performance, yet the neural mechanisms underlying this interaction are unknown. We combined transcranial magnetic stimulation, electroencephalography, electromyography, and behavioral measures to compare selective and global inhibition models and to investigate markers of proactive control. The results favor a single inhibitory mechanism over separate selective and global mechanisms but indicate a vital role for preceding motor activity in determining whether and which actions will be stopped.

Age-related alterations in the modulation of intracortical inhibition during stopping of actions

We investigated the effect of age on the ability to modulate GABA_A-ergic and GABA_B-ergic inhibitory activity during stopping of action (reactive inhibition) and preparation to stop (proactive inhibition). Twenty-five young and twenty-nine older adults performed an anticipated response version of the stop-signal task with varying levels of stop-signal probability. Paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied to left primary motor cortex to assess the modulation of GABA_A-mediated short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) during stopping and GABA_B-mediated long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) during the anticipation of a stop-signal. At the behavioral level, reactive inhibition was affected by aging as indicated by longer stop-signal reaction times in older compared to young adults. In contrast, proactive inhibition was preserved at older age as both groups slowed down their go response to a similar degree with increasing stop-signal probability. At the neural level, the amount of SICI was higher in successful stop relative to go trials in young but not in older adults. LICI at the start of the trial was modulated as a function of stop-signal probability in both young and older adults. Our results suggest that specifically the recruitment of GABA_A-mediated intracortical inhibition during stopping of action is affected by aging.

Response inhibition in humans: a whistle stop review

This Neuro Forum presents insights from recent literature on the neurophysiology and pathoneurophysiology of reactive (speed of action stopping) and proactive (slowing of action in anticipation of stopping) response inhibition. We discuss recent studies using novel brain stimulation and spectroscopy techniques that reveal the role of cortico-subcortical networks and the neurotransmitter γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and how these mechanisms are influenced by healthy aging. Furthermore, we also briefly discuss computational modeling approaches, which assist in establishing meaningful differences in response inhibition.

Tuning the Corticospinal System: How Distributed Brain Circuits Shape Human Actions

Interactive behaviors rely on the operation of several processes allowing the control of actions, including their selection, withholding, and cancellation. The corticospinal system provides a unique route through which multiple brain circuits can exert control over bodily motor acts. In humans, the influence of these modulatory circuits on the corticospinal system can be probed using various transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) protocols. Here, we review neural data from TMS studies at the basis of our current understanding of how diverse pathways—including intra-cortical, trans-cortical, and subcortico-cortical circuits—contribute to action control by tuning the activity of the corticospinal system. Critically, when doing so, we point out important caveats in the field that arise from the fact that these circuits, and their impact on the corticospinal system, have not been considered equivalently for action selection, withholding, and cancellation. This has led to the misleading view that some circuits or regions are specialized in specific control processes and that they produce particular modulatory changes in corticospinal excitability (e.g., generic vs. specific modulation of corticospinal excitability). Hence, we point to the need for more transversal research approaches in the field of action control.

Connectivity of the Frontal Cortical Oscillatory Dynamics Underlying Inhibitory Control During a Go/No-Go Task as a Predictive Biomarker in Major Depression

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is characterized by core functional deficits in cognitive inhibition, which is crucial for emotion regulation. To assess the response to ruminative and negative mood states, it was hypothesized that MDD patients have prolonged disparities in the oscillatory dynamics of the frontal cortical regions across the life course of the disease.

METHOD

A "go/no-go" response inhibition paradigm was tested in 31 MDD patients and 19 age-matched healthy controls after magnetoencephalography (MEG) scanning. The use of minimum norm estimates (MNE) examined the changes of inhibitory control network which included the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG), pre-supplementary motor area (preSMA), and left primary motor cortex (lM1). The power spectrum (PS) within each node and the functional connectivity (FC) between nodes were compared between two groups. Furthermore, Pearson correlation was calculated to estimate the relationship between altered FC and clinical features.

RESULT

PS was significantly reduced in left motor and preSMA of MDD patients in both beta (13-30 Hz) and low gamma (30-50 Hz) bands. Compared to the HC group, the MDD group demonstrated higher connectivity between lM1 and preSMA in the beta band (t = 3.214, p = 0.002, FDR corrected) and showed reduced connectivity between preSMA and rIFG in the low gamma band (t = -2.612, p = 0.012, FDR corrected). The FC between lM1 and preSMA in the beta band was positively correlated with illness duration (r = 0.475, p = 0.005, FDR corrected), while the FC between preSMA and rIFG in the low gamma band was negatively correlated with illness duration (r = -0.509, p = 0.002, FDR corrected) and retardation factor scores (r = -0.288, p = 0.022, uncorrected).

CONCLUSION

In this study, a clinical neurophysiological signature of cognitive inhibition leading to sustained negative affect as well as functional non-recovery in MDD patients is highlighted. Duration of illness (DI) plays a key role in negative emotional processing, heighten rumination, impulsivity, and disinhibition.

Between-hand coupling during response inhibition

Response inhibition reflects the process of terminating inappropriate preplanned or ongoing movements. When one hand is cued to stop after preparing a bimanual response (Partial trial), there is a substantial delay on the responding side. This delay is termed the interference effect and identifies a constraint that limits selective response inhibition. γ-Aminobutyric acid (GABA)-mediated networks within primary motor cortex (M1) may have distinct roles during response inhibition. In this study we examined whether the interference effect is the consequence of between-hand "coupling" into a unitary response and whether this is reflected in GABAergic intracortical inhibition within M1. Eighteen healthy right-handed participants performed a bimanual synchronous and asynchronous anticipatory response inhibition task. Electromyographic recordings were obtained from the first dorsal interosseous muscle bilaterally. Motor evoked potentials were elicited by single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation over right M1. As expected, Go trial performance was better with the synchronous compared with the asynchronous version of the task. Paradoxically, response delays during Partial trials were longer with the synchronous compared with the asynchronous task. Although task difficulty did not modulate GABAergic intracortical inhibition, there was a trend for between-hand coupling on asynchronous trials to be associated with greater GABA_B receptor-mediated inhibition and lesser recruitment of GABA_A receptor-mediated inhibition. The novel findings indicate that the interference effect is in part a consequence of between-hand coupling into a unitary response during movement preparation. The ability to respond independently with the two hands may rely on modulation of distinct inhibitory processes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The temporal dynamics of an anticipated response task were manipulated to effect the difficulty of behavioral stopping and the underlying effects on motor neurophysiology. There were large response delays during trials where a subcomponent of an upcoming bimanual response was cued to stop in conditions where the anticipated action of the hands were synchronous, but not when asynchronous. Response delays reflected the integration of actions of both hands into a unitary response.

Using transcranial magnetic stimulation to investigate the neural mechanisms of inhibitory control

Many everyday actions require inhibitory control. The success of these actions depends on the availability of prior information regarding stopping demands. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), Cirillo and colleagues (Cirillo J, Cowie MJ, MacDonald HJ, Byblow WD. J Neurophysiol 119: 877-886, 2018) provide novel neurophysiological evidence for distinct roles of intracortical inhibitory mechanisms underlying inhibitory control. Other, nonexclusive mechanisms such as disfacilitation of excitatory pathways and interhemispheric inhibition may also contribute to inhibitory control. Accordingly, diverse TMS protocols are a valuable assessment tool to investigate these mechanisms.