Cargando…

How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach

Response inhibition is an essential control function necessary to adapt one’s behavior. This key cognitive capacity is assumed to be dependent on the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia. It is unresolved whether varying inhibitory demands engage different control mechanisms or whether a single motor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio, Knight, Robert T., Krämer, Ulrike M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4529397/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25660306
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.01.012
_version_ 1782384790979215360
author Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio
Knight, Robert T.
Krämer, Ulrike M.
author_facet Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio
Knight, Robert T.
Krämer, Ulrike M.
author_sort Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio
collection PubMed
description Response inhibition is an essential control function necessary to adapt one’s behavior. This key cognitive capacity is assumed to be dependent on the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia. It is unresolved whether varying inhibitory demands engage different control mechanisms or whether a single motor inhibitory mechanism is involved in any situation. We addressed this question by comparing electrophysiological activity in conditions that require stopping a response to conditions that require switching to an alternate response. Analyses of electrophysiological data obtained from stop-signal tasks are complicated by overlapping stimulus-related activity that is distributed over frontal and parietal cortical recording sites. Here, we applied Laplacian transformation and independent component analysis (ICA) to overcome these difficulties. Participants were faster in switching compared to stopping a response, but we did not observe differences in neural activity between these conditions. Both stop- and change-trials Laplacian transformed ERPs revealed a comparable bilateral parieto-occipital negativity around 180 ms and a frontocentral negativity around 220 ms. ICA results suggested an inhibition-related frontocentral component which was characterized by a negativity around 200 ms with a likely source in anterior cingulate cortex. The data provide support for the importance of posterior mediofrontal areas in inhibitory response control and are consistent with a common neural pathway underlying stopping and changing a motor response. The methodological approach proved useful to distinguish frontal and parietal sources despite similar timing and the ICA approach allowed assessment of single-trial data with respect to behavioral data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4529397
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45293972016-09-01 How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio Knight, Robert T. Krämer, Ulrike M. Int J Psychophysiol Article Response inhibition is an essential control function necessary to adapt one’s behavior. This key cognitive capacity is assumed to be dependent on the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia. It is unresolved whether varying inhibitory demands engage different control mechanisms or whether a single motor inhibitory mechanism is involved in any situation. We addressed this question by comparing electrophysiological activity in conditions that require stopping a response to conditions that require switching to an alternate response. Analyses of electrophysiological data obtained from stop-signal tasks are complicated by overlapping stimulus-related activity that is distributed over frontal and parietal cortical recording sites. Here, we applied Laplacian transformation and independent component analysis (ICA) to overcome these difficulties. Participants were faster in switching compared to stopping a response, but we did not observe differences in neural activity between these conditions. Both stop- and change-trials Laplacian transformed ERPs revealed a comparable bilateral parieto-occipital negativity around 180 ms and a frontocentral negativity around 220 ms. ICA results suggested an inhibition-related frontocentral component which was characterized by a negativity around 200 ms with a likely source in anterior cingulate cortex. The data provide support for the importance of posterior mediofrontal areas in inhibitory response control and are consistent with a common neural pathway underlying stopping and changing a motor response. The methodological approach proved useful to distinguish frontal and parietal sources despite similar timing and the ICA approach allowed assessment of single-trial data with respect to behavioral data. 2015-02-07 2015-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4529397/ /pubmed/25660306 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.01.012 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This manuscript version is made available under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
spellingShingle Article
Rangel-Gomez, Mauricio
Knight, Robert T.
Krämer, Ulrike M.
How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title_full How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title_fullStr How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title_full_unstemmed How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title_short How to stop or change a motor response: Laplacian and independent component analysis approach
title_sort how to stop or change a motor response: laplacian and independent component analysis approach
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4529397/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25660306
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.01.012
work_keys_str_mv AT rangelgomezmauricio howtostoporchangeamotorresponselaplacianandindependentcomponentanalysisapproach
AT knightrobertt howtostoporchangeamotorresponselaplacianandindependentcomponentanalysisapproach
AT kramerulrikem howtostoporchangeamotorresponselaplacianandindependentcomponentanalysisapproach