Cargando…

Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition

The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate – in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chatham, Christopher H., Claus, Eric D., Kim, Albert, Curran, Tim, Banich, Marie T., Munakata, Yuko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3288048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22384038
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031546
_version_ 1782224793326583808
author Chatham, Christopher H.
Claus, Eric D.
Kim, Albert
Curran, Tim
Banich, Marie T.
Munakata, Yuko
author_facet Chatham, Christopher H.
Claus, Eric D.
Kim, Albert
Curran, Tim
Banich, Marie T.
Munakata, Yuko
author_sort Chatham, Christopher H.
collection PubMed
description The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate – in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which we refer to as context-monitoring. Using behavioral, neuroimaging, electrophysiological and computational approaches, we tested whether motoric stopping per se is the cognitively-controlled process supporting response inhibition, or whether context-monitoring may fill this role. Our results demonstrate that inhibition does not require control mechanisms beyond those involved in context-monitoring, and that such control mechanisms are the same regardless of stopping demands. These results challenge dominant accounts of inhibitory control, which posit that motoric stopping is the cognitively-controlled process of response inhibition, and clarify emerging debates on the frontal substrates of response inhibition by replacing the centrality of controlled mechanisms for motoric stopping with context-monitoring.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3288048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32880482012-03-01 Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition Chatham, Christopher H. Claus, Eric D. Kim, Albert Curran, Tim Banich, Marie T. Munakata, Yuko PLoS One Research Article The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate – in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which we refer to as context-monitoring. Using behavioral, neuroimaging, electrophysiological and computational approaches, we tested whether motoric stopping per se is the cognitively-controlled process supporting response inhibition, or whether context-monitoring may fill this role. Our results demonstrate that inhibition does not require control mechanisms beyond those involved in context-monitoring, and that such control mechanisms are the same regardless of stopping demands. These results challenge dominant accounts of inhibitory control, which posit that motoric stopping is the cognitively-controlled process of response inhibition, and clarify emerging debates on the frontal substrates of response inhibition by replacing the centrality of controlled mechanisms for motoric stopping with context-monitoring. Public Library of Science 2012-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3288048/ /pubmed/22384038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031546 Text en Chatham et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chatham, Christopher H.
Claus, Eric D.
Kim, Albert
Curran, Tim
Banich, Marie T.
Munakata, Yuko
Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title_full Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title_fullStr Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title_full_unstemmed Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title_short Cognitive Control Reflects Context Monitoring, Not Motoric Stopping, in Response Inhibition
title_sort cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3288048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22384038
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031546
work_keys_str_mv AT chathamchristopherh cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
AT clausericd cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
AT kimalbert cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
AT currantim cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
AT banichmariet cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
AT munakatayuko cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition