Cargando…

Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities

Proactive inhibition is divided into two components: action postponing (AP), which refers to slowing the onset of response, and action restraint (AR), which refers to preventing the response. To date, several studies have reported alterations in proactive inhibition and its associated neural process...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ikarashi, Koyuki, Sato, Daisuke, Ochi, Genta, Fujimoto, Tomomi, Yamashiro, Koya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9688532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36421854
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12111530
_version_ 1784836292107829248
author Ikarashi, Koyuki
Sato, Daisuke
Ochi, Genta
Fujimoto, Tomomi
Yamashiro, Koya
author_facet Ikarashi, Koyuki
Sato, Daisuke
Ochi, Genta
Fujimoto, Tomomi
Yamashiro, Koya
author_sort Ikarashi, Koyuki
collection PubMed
description Proactive inhibition is divided into two components: action postponing (AP), which refers to slowing the onset of response, and action restraint (AR), which refers to preventing the response. To date, several studies have reported alterations in proactive inhibition and its associated neural processing among sensory modalities; however, this remains inconclusive owing to several methodological issues. This study aimed to clarify the differences in AP and AR and their neural processing among visual, auditory, and somatosensory modalities using an appropriate experimental paradigm that can assess AP and AR separately. The postponing time calculated by subtracting simple reaction time from Go signal reaction time was shorter in the visual modality than in the other modalities. This was explained by faster neural processing for conflict monitoring induced by anticipating the presence of the No-go signal, supported by the shorter latency of AP-related N2. Furthermore, the percentage of false alarms, which is the reaction to No-go signals, was lower in the visual modality than in the auditory modality. This was attributed to higher neural resources for conflict monitoring induced by the presence of No-go signals, supported by the larger amplitudes of AR-related N2. Our findings revealed the differences in AP and AR and their neural processing among sensory modalities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9688532
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96885322022-11-25 Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities Ikarashi, Koyuki Sato, Daisuke Ochi, Genta Fujimoto, Tomomi Yamashiro, Koya Brain Sci Article Proactive inhibition is divided into two components: action postponing (AP), which refers to slowing the onset of response, and action restraint (AR), which refers to preventing the response. To date, several studies have reported alterations in proactive inhibition and its associated neural processing among sensory modalities; however, this remains inconclusive owing to several methodological issues. This study aimed to clarify the differences in AP and AR and their neural processing among visual, auditory, and somatosensory modalities using an appropriate experimental paradigm that can assess AP and AR separately. The postponing time calculated by subtracting simple reaction time from Go signal reaction time was shorter in the visual modality than in the other modalities. This was explained by faster neural processing for conflict monitoring induced by anticipating the presence of the No-go signal, supported by the shorter latency of AP-related N2. Furthermore, the percentage of false alarms, which is the reaction to No-go signals, was lower in the visual modality than in the auditory modality. This was attributed to higher neural resources for conflict monitoring induced by the presence of No-go signals, supported by the larger amplitudes of AR-related N2. Our findings revealed the differences in AP and AR and their neural processing among sensory modalities. MDPI 2022-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9688532/ /pubmed/36421854 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12111530 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ikarashi, Koyuki
Sato, Daisuke
Ochi, Genta
Fujimoto, Tomomi
Yamashiro, Koya
Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title_full Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title_fullStr Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title_full_unstemmed Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title_short Action Postponing and Restraint Varies among Sensory Modalities
title_sort action postponing and restraint varies among sensory modalities
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9688532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36421854
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12111530
work_keys_str_mv AT ikarashikoyuki actionpostponingandrestraintvariesamongsensorymodalities
AT satodaisuke actionpostponingandrestraintvariesamongsensorymodalities
AT ochigenta actionpostponingandrestraintvariesamongsensorymodalities
AT fujimototomomi actionpostponingandrestraintvariesamongsensorymodalities
AT yamashirokoya actionpostponingandrestraintvariesamongsensorymodalities