Suppr超能文献

差异统一:Go/No-go 和停止信号任务依赖于不同的机制。

Differences in unity: The go/no-go and stop signal tasks rely on different mechanisms.

机构信息

Multimodal Imaging and Cognitive Control Lab, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway; Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience Cluster, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway.

Center for Lifespan Changes in Brain and Cognition (LCBC), Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

Neuroimage. 2020 Apr 15;210:116582. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116582. Epub 2020 Jan 25.

Abstract

Response inhibition refers to the suppression of prepared or initiated actions. Typically, the go/no-go task (GNGT) or the stop signal task (SST) are used interchangeably to capture individual differences in response inhibition. On the one hand, factor analytic and conjunction neuroimaging studies support the association of both tasks with a single inhibition construct. On the other hand, studies that directly compare the two tasks indicate distinct mechanisms, corresponding to action restraint and cancellation in the GNGT and SST, respectively. We addressed these contradictory findings with the aim to identify the core differences in the temporal dynamics of the functional networks that are recruited in both tasks. We extracted the time-courses of sensory, motor, attentional, and cognitive control networks by group independent component (G-ICA) analysis of electroencephalography (EEG) data from both tasks. Additionally, electromyography (EMG) from the responding effector muscles was recorded to detect the timing of response inhibition. The results indicated that inhibitory performance in the GNGT may be comparable to response selection mechanisms, reaching peripheral muscles at around 316 ​ms. In contrast, inhibitory performance in the SST is achieved via biasing of the sensorimotor system in preparation for stopping, followed by fast sensory, motor and frontal integration during outright stopping. Inhibition can be detected at the peripheral level at 140 ​ms after stop stimulus presentation. The GNGT and the SST therefore seem to recruit widely different neural dynamics, implying that the interchangeable use of superficially similar inhibition tasks in both basic and clinical research is unwarranted.

摘要

反应抑制是指对已准备好或已启动的动作的抑制。通常,采用 Go/No-Go 任务(GNGT)或停止信号任务(SST)来相互替换,以捕捉个体在反应抑制方面的差异。一方面,因素分析和联合神经影像学研究支持这两个任务与单一的抑制结构有关。另一方面,直接比较这两个任务的研究表明存在不同的机制,分别对应于 GNGT 中的动作抑制和取消,以及 SST 中的动作抑制和取消。我们旨在确定在这两个任务中被招募的功能网络的时间动态的核心差异,从而解决这些相互矛盾的发现。我们通过对 GNGT 和 SST 的脑电图(EEG)数据进行组独立成分(G-ICA)分析,提取了感觉、运动、注意和认知控制网络的时间进程。此外,还记录了反应效应器肌肉的肌电图(EMG),以检测反应抑制的时间。结果表明,GNGT 中的抑制性能可能与反应选择机制相当,在大约 316 毫秒时到达外周肌肉。相比之下,SST 中的抑制性能是通过对感觉运动系统进行偏向以准备停止,然后在完全停止期间快速进行感觉、运动和额叶整合来实现的。在停止刺激呈现后 140 毫秒,可以在外周水平检测到抑制。因此,GNGT 和 SST 似乎招募了广泛不同的神经动力学,这意味着在基础和临床研究中,不可互换地使用表面上相似的抑制任务是不合理的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验