Cargando…
Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently
People are able to stop actions before they are executed, and proactively slow down the speed of going in line with their expectations of needing to stop. Such slowing generally increases the probability that stopping will be successful. Surprisingly though, no study has clearly demonstrated that th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ubiquity Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10162359/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37152832 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.264 |
_version_ | 1785037686510190592 |
---|---|
author | Doekemeijer, Roos A. Dewulf, Anneleen Verbruggen, Frederick Boehler, C. Nico |
author_facet | Doekemeijer, Roos A. Dewulf, Anneleen Verbruggen, Frederick Boehler, C. Nico |
author_sort | Doekemeijer, Roos A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | People are able to stop actions before they are executed, and proactively slow down the speed of going in line with their expectations of needing to stop. Such slowing generally increases the probability that stopping will be successful. Surprisingly though, no study has clearly demonstrated that the speed of stopping (measured as the stop-signal reaction time, SSRT) is reduced by such proactive adjustments. In addition to a number of studies showing non-significant effects, the only study that initially had observed a clear effect in this direction found that it was artifactually driven by a confounding variable (specifically, by context-independence violations, which jeopardize the validity of the SSRT estimation). Here, we tested in two well-powered and well-controlled experiments whether the SSRT is shorter when stopping is anticipated. In each experiment, we used a Stop-Signal Task, in which the stop-trial frequency was either high (50%) or low (20%). Our results robustly show that the SSRT was shorter when stop signals were more anticipated (i.e., in the high-frequent condition) while carefully controlling for context-independence violations. Hence, our study is first to demonstrate a clear proactive benefit on the speed of stopping, in line with an ability to emphasize going or stopping, by trading off the speed of both. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10162359 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Ubiquity Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101623592023-05-06 Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently Doekemeijer, Roos A. Dewulf, Anneleen Verbruggen, Frederick Boehler, C. Nico J Cogn Research Article People are able to stop actions before they are executed, and proactively slow down the speed of going in line with their expectations of needing to stop. Such slowing generally increases the probability that stopping will be successful. Surprisingly though, no study has clearly demonstrated that the speed of stopping (measured as the stop-signal reaction time, SSRT) is reduced by such proactive adjustments. In addition to a number of studies showing non-significant effects, the only study that initially had observed a clear effect in this direction found that it was artifactually driven by a confounding variable (specifically, by context-independence violations, which jeopardize the validity of the SSRT estimation). Here, we tested in two well-powered and well-controlled experiments whether the SSRT is shorter when stopping is anticipated. In each experiment, we used a Stop-Signal Task, in which the stop-trial frequency was either high (50%) or low (20%). Our results robustly show that the SSRT was shorter when stop signals were more anticipated (i.e., in the high-frequent condition) while carefully controlling for context-independence violations. Hence, our study is first to demonstrate a clear proactive benefit on the speed of stopping, in line with an ability to emphasize going or stopping, by trading off the speed of both. Ubiquity Press 2023-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10162359/ /pubmed/37152832 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.264 Text en Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Doekemeijer, Roos A. Dewulf, Anneleen Verbruggen, Frederick Boehler, C. Nico Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title | Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title_full | Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title_fullStr | Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title_full_unstemmed | Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title_short | Proactively Adjusting Stopping: Response Inhibition is Faster when Stopping Occurs Frequently |
title_sort | proactively adjusting stopping: response inhibition is faster when stopping occurs frequently |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10162359/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37152832 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.264 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT doekemeijerroosa proactivelyadjustingstoppingresponseinhibitionisfasterwhenstoppingoccursfrequently AT dewulfanneleen proactivelyadjustingstoppingresponseinhibitionisfasterwhenstoppingoccursfrequently AT verbruggenfrederick proactivelyadjustingstoppingresponseinhibitionisfasterwhenstoppingoccursfrequently AT boehlercnico proactivelyadjustingstoppingresponseinhibitionisfasterwhenstoppingoccursfrequently |