The effects of discrimination on the adoption of different strategies in selective stopping

Response Preparation Affects Cognitive Motor Control

OBJECTIVE

We investigated how the ability to control whether or not to inhibit an action is affected by the response preparation.

BACKGROUND

The ability to control actions is a central skill to properly behave in complex environments. Increased levels of response preparation are associated with reduced response times, but how they directly affect the ability to control actions is not well explored. We investigated how the response preparation affects the ability to control the generation of actions in the context of a stop selective task.

METHOD

Participants performed a visuo-motor stop selective task.

RESULTS

We found that an increased level of response preparation reduced the ability to control actions. In the condition with high preparation, we observed shorter response times and increased probability of wrong responses to a request to stop, compared to a condition with a lower level of preparation.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that high response preparation hinders action control.

APPLICATION

Understanding the cognitive factors that affect the ability to properly control actions is crucial to develop devices that can be exploited in different contexts such as the aviation, industrial, and military. We demonstrated that subjects' response preparation is a key factor influencing their ability to flexibly control their reaction to different stimuli. This study offers a suitable paradigm that can be used to investigate which system features in a controlled task promote an optimal balance between response speed and error rate.

A global pause generates nonselective response inhibition during selective stopping

Selective response inhibition may be required when stopping a part of a multicomponent action. A persistent response delay (stopping-interference effect) indicates nonselective response inhibition during selective stopping. This study aimed to elucidate whether nonselective response inhibition is the consequence of a global pause process during attentional capture or specific to a nonselective cancel process during selective stopping. Twenty healthy human participants performed a bimanual anticipatory response inhibition paradigm with selective stop and ignore signals. Frontocentral and sensorimotor beta-bursts were recorded with electroencephalography. Corticomotor excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition in primary motor cortex were recorded with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Behaviorally, responses in the non-signaled hand were delayed during selective ignore and stop trials. The response delay was largest during selective stop trials and indicated that stopping-interference could not be attributed entirely to attentional capture. A stimulus-nonselective increase in frontocentral beta-bursts occurred during stop and ignore trials. Sensorimotor response inhibition was reflected in maintenance of beta-bursts and short-interval intracortical inhibition relative to disinhibition observed during go trials. Response inhibition signatures were not associated with the magnitude of stopping-interference. Therefore, nonselective response inhibition during selective stopping results primarily from a nonselective pause process but does not entirely account for the stopping-interference effect.

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.

Estimating the Time to Do Nothing: Toward Next-Generation Models of Response Inhibition

Controlled behavior requires response inhibition, which is a cognitive function that involves withholding action as goals change. Response inhibition is often assessed using the stop-signal paradigm, in which participants respond to most stimuli but periodically withhold their response when a subsequent stop signal occurs. The stop-signal paradigm rests on the theoretical foundation of the independent race model, which assumes a stop racer that races independently against a go racer; behavior is determined by which racer finishes first. We highlight work showing violations of the keystone independence assumption of existing stop models and discuss promising new models of response inhibition.

The development of selective stopping: Qualitative and quantitative changes from childhood to early adulthood

Although progress has been made in elucidating the behavioral and neural development of global stopping across the lifespan, little is known about the development of selective stopping. This more complex form of inhibitory control is required in real-world situations where ongoing responses must be inhibited to certain stimuli but not others, and can be assessed in laboratory settings using a stimulus selective stopping task. Here we used this task to investigate the qualitative and quantitative developmental changes in selective stopping in a large-scale cross-sectional study with three different age groups (children, preadolescents, and young adults). We found that the ability to stop a response selectively to some stimuli (i.e., use a selective strategy) rather than non-selectively to all presented stimuli (i.e., use a global, non-selective strategy) is fully mature by early preadolescence, and remains stable afterwards at least until young adulthood. By contrast, the efficiency or speed of stopping (indexed by a shorter stop-signal reaction time or SSRT) continues to mature throughout adolescence until young adulthood, both for global and selective implementations of stopping. We also provide some preliminary findings regarding which other task variables beyond the strategy and SSRT predicted age group status. Premature responding (an index of "waiting impulsivity") and post-ignore slowing (an index of cognitive control) were among the most relevant predictors in discriminating between developmental age groups. Although present results need to be confirmed and extended in longitudinal studies, they provide new insights into the development of a relevant form of inhibitory control.

Selective Inhibitory Control in Middle Childhood

The main aim of this study was to investigate the development of selective inhibitory control in middle childhood, a critical period for the maturation of inhibition-related processes. To this end, 64 children aged 6–7 and 56 children aged 10–11 performed a stimulus-selective stop-signal task, which allowed us to estimate not only the efficiency of response inhibition (the stop-signal reaction time or SSRT), but also the strategy adopted by participants to achieve task demands. We found that the adoption of a non-selective (global) strategy characterized by stopping indiscriminately to all stimuli decreased in older children, so that most of them were able to interrupt their ongoing responses selectively at the end of middle childhood. Moreover, compared to younger children, older children were more efficient in their ability to cancel an initiated response (indexed by a shorter SSRT), regardless of which strategy they used. Additionally, we found improvements in other forms of impulsivity, such as the control of premature responding (waiting impulsivity), and attentional-related processes, such as intra-individual variability and distractibility. The present results suggest that middle childhood represents a milestone in the development of crucial aspects of inhibitory control, including selective stopping.