Cargando…

A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate whether processing a prepared response toward a dangerous object in a previous trial influences subsequent trial processing. METHODS: The design manipulated the Go/NoGo factor of the current trial, the target dangerousness of the previous trial and that o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Peng, Wang, Xiaoyi, Cao, Gai, Li, Jia, Zhang, Jing, Cao, Rong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6192396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30176195
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1112
_version_ 1783363904158564352
author Liu, Peng
Wang, Xiaoyi
Cao, Gai
Li, Jia
Zhang, Jing
Cao, Rong
author_facet Liu, Peng
Wang, Xiaoyi
Cao, Gai
Li, Jia
Zhang, Jing
Cao, Rong
author_sort Liu, Peng
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate whether processing a prepared response toward a dangerous object in a previous trial influences subsequent trial processing. METHODS: The design manipulated the Go/NoGo factor of the current trial, the target dangerousness of the previous trial and that of the current trial. RESULTS: In current Go trials, the behavioral results revealed a classical motor interference effect in trials that were preceded by a safe trial (a longer reaction time (RT) and a larger error rate for the previous safe and current dangerous (sD) condition than for the previous safe and current safe (sS) condition). However, the motor interference effect diminished in trials that were preceded by a dangerous trial (insignificant differences in the mean RTs and error rates between the previous dangerous and current dangerous (dD) condition and the previous dangerous and current safe (dS) condition). The event‐related potential (ERP) results identified more positive P2 and parietal P3 amplitudes (indicating attentional resource allocation) for the dD condition than for the dS condition. However, the P2 and parietal P3 amplitudes of the sD condition did not significantly differ from those of the sS condition. DISCUSSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that the avoidance motivation elicited by a dangerous target in a previous trial may indicate a dangerous situation, which leads to recruitment of more attentional resources allocated to the subsequent dangerous trial. Therefore, RTs are improved and errors are reduced in the consecutive dangerous condition, subsequently decreasing the motor interference effect in trials preceded by a dangerous trial compared with trials preceded by a safe trial. However, analysis of current NoGo trials revealed that none of the main effects or interactions reached significance in both the behavioral and ERP results, indicating that the hypothesis holds true only if the prepared response needs to be executed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6192396
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61923962018-10-22 A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study Liu, Peng Wang, Xiaoyi Cao, Gai Li, Jia Zhang, Jing Cao, Rong Brain Behav Original Research INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate whether processing a prepared response toward a dangerous object in a previous trial influences subsequent trial processing. METHODS: The design manipulated the Go/NoGo factor of the current trial, the target dangerousness of the previous trial and that of the current trial. RESULTS: In current Go trials, the behavioral results revealed a classical motor interference effect in trials that were preceded by a safe trial (a longer reaction time (RT) and a larger error rate for the previous safe and current dangerous (sD) condition than for the previous safe and current safe (sS) condition). However, the motor interference effect diminished in trials that were preceded by a dangerous trial (insignificant differences in the mean RTs and error rates between the previous dangerous and current dangerous (dD) condition and the previous dangerous and current safe (dS) condition). The event‐related potential (ERP) results identified more positive P2 and parietal P3 amplitudes (indicating attentional resource allocation) for the dD condition than for the dS condition. However, the P2 and parietal P3 amplitudes of the sD condition did not significantly differ from those of the sS condition. DISCUSSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that the avoidance motivation elicited by a dangerous target in a previous trial may indicate a dangerous situation, which leads to recruitment of more attentional resources allocated to the subsequent dangerous trial. Therefore, RTs are improved and errors are reduced in the consecutive dangerous condition, subsequently decreasing the motor interference effect in trials preceded by a dangerous trial compared with trials preceded by a safe trial. However, analysis of current NoGo trials revealed that none of the main effects or interactions reached significance in both the behavioral and ERP results, indicating that the hypothesis holds true only if the prepared response needs to be executed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-09-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6192396/ /pubmed/30176195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1112 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Liu, Peng
Wang, Xiaoyi
Cao, Gai
Li, Jia
Zhang, Jing
Cao, Rong
A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title_full A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title_fullStr A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title_full_unstemmed A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title_short A sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: An ERP study
title_sort sequential trial effect based on the motor interference effect from dangerous objects: an erp study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6192396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30176195
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1112
work_keys_str_mv AT liupeng asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT wangxiaoyi asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT caogai asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT lijia asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT zhangjing asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT caorong asequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT liupeng sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT wangxiaoyi sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT caogai sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT lijia sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT zhangjing sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy
AT caorong sequentialtrialeffectbasedonthemotorinterferenceeffectfromdangerousobjectsanerpstudy