Cargando…

Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()

Flexible behavior requires a control system that can inhibit actions in response to changes in the environment. Recent studies suggest that people proactively adjust response parameters in anticipation of a stop signal. In three experiments, we tested the hypothesis that proactive inhibitory control...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elchlepp, Heike, Lavric, Aureliu, Chambers, Christopher D., Verbruggen, Frederick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academic Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4825542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26859519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.01.004
_version_ 1782426243363241984
author Elchlepp, Heike
Lavric, Aureliu
Chambers, Christopher D.
Verbruggen, Frederick
author_facet Elchlepp, Heike
Lavric, Aureliu
Chambers, Christopher D.
Verbruggen, Frederick
author_sort Elchlepp, Heike
collection PubMed
description Flexible behavior requires a control system that can inhibit actions in response to changes in the environment. Recent studies suggest that people proactively adjust response parameters in anticipation of a stop signal. In three experiments, we tested the hypothesis that proactive inhibitory control involves adjusting both attentional and response settings, and we explored the relationship with other forms of proactive and anticipatory control. Subjects responded to the color of a stimulus. On some trials, an extra signal occurred. The response to this signal depended on the task context subjects were in: in the ‘ignore’ context, they ignored it; in the ‘stop’ context, they had to withhold their response; and in the ‘double-response’ context, they had to execute a secondary response. An analysis of event-related brain potentials for no-signal trials in the stop context revealed that proactive inhibitory control works by biasing the settings of lower-level systems that are involved in stimulus detection, action selection, and action execution. Furthermore, subjects made similar adjustments in the double-response and stop-signal contexts, indicating an overlap between various forms of proactive action control. The results of Experiment 1 also suggest an overlap between proactive inhibitory control and preparatory control in task-switching studies: both require reconfiguration of task-set parameters to bias or alter subordinate processes. We conclude that much of the top-down control in response inhibition tasks takes place before the inhibition signal is presented.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4825542
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Academic Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48255422016-05-01 Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account() Elchlepp, Heike Lavric, Aureliu Chambers, Christopher D. Verbruggen, Frederick Cogn Psychol Article Flexible behavior requires a control system that can inhibit actions in response to changes in the environment. Recent studies suggest that people proactively adjust response parameters in anticipation of a stop signal. In three experiments, we tested the hypothesis that proactive inhibitory control involves adjusting both attentional and response settings, and we explored the relationship with other forms of proactive and anticipatory control. Subjects responded to the color of a stimulus. On some trials, an extra signal occurred. The response to this signal depended on the task context subjects were in: in the ‘ignore’ context, they ignored it; in the ‘stop’ context, they had to withhold their response; and in the ‘double-response’ context, they had to execute a secondary response. An analysis of event-related brain potentials for no-signal trials in the stop context revealed that proactive inhibitory control works by biasing the settings of lower-level systems that are involved in stimulus detection, action selection, and action execution. Furthermore, subjects made similar adjustments in the double-response and stop-signal contexts, indicating an overlap between various forms of proactive action control. The results of Experiment 1 also suggest an overlap between proactive inhibitory control and preparatory control in task-switching studies: both require reconfiguration of task-set parameters to bias or alter subordinate processes. We conclude that much of the top-down control in response inhibition tasks takes place before the inhibition signal is presented. Academic Press 2016-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4825542/ /pubmed/26859519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.01.004 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Elchlepp, Heike
Lavric, Aureliu
Chambers, Christopher D.
Verbruggen, Frederick
Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title_full Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title_fullStr Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title_full_unstemmed Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title_short Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account()
title_sort proactive inhibitory control: a general biasing account()
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4825542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26859519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.01.004
work_keys_str_mv AT elchleppheike proactiveinhibitorycontrolageneralbiasingaccount
AT lavricaureliu proactiveinhibitorycontrolageneralbiasingaccount
AT chamberschristopherd proactiveinhibitorycontrolageneralbiasingaccount
AT verbruggenfrederick proactiveinhibitorycontrolageneralbiasingaccount