Marc Isabel Beatrice, Giuffrida Valentina, Ramawat Surabhi, Fiori Lorenzo, Fontana Roberto, Bardella Giampiero, Fagioli Sabrina, Ferraina Stefano, Pani Pierpaolo, Brunamonti Emiliano
Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Behavioral Neuroscience PhD Program, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2023 Feb 10;17:1106298. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2023.1106298. eCollection 2023.
Goal-oriented actions often require the coordinated movement of two or more effectors. Sometimes multi-effector movements need to be adjusted according to a continuously changing environment, requiring stopping an effector without interrupting the movement of the others. This form of control has been investigated by the selective Stop Signal Task (SST), requiring the inhibition of an effector of a multicomponent action. This form of selective inhibition has been hypothesized to act through a two-step process, where a temporary global inhibition deactivating all the ongoing motor responses is followed by a restarting process that reactivates only the moving effector. When this form of inhibition takes place, the reaction time (RT) of the moving effector pays the cost of the previous global inhibition. However, it is poorly investigated if and how this cost delays the RT of the effector that was required to be stopped but was erroneously moved (Stop Error trials). Here we measure the Stop Error RT in a group of participants instructed to simultaneously rotate the wrist and lift the foot when a Go Signal occurred, and interrupt both movements (non-selective Stop version) or only one of them (selective Stop version) when a Stop Signal was presented. We presented this task in two experimental conditions to evaluate how different contexts can influence a possible proactive inhibition on the RT of the moving effector in the selective Stop versions. In one context, we provided the foreknowledge of the effector to be inhibited by presenting the same selective or non-selective Stop versions in the same block of trials. In a different context, while providing no foreknowledge of the effector(s) to be stopped, the selective and non-selective Stop versions were intermingled, and the information on the effector to be stopped was delivered at the time of the Stop Signal presentation. We detected a cost in both Correct and Error selective Stop RTs that was influenced by the different task conditions. Results are discussed within the framework of the race model related to the SST, and its relationship with a restart model developed for selective versions of this paradigm.
目标导向的行动通常需要两个或更多效应器的协调运动。有时，多效应器运动需要根据不断变化的环境进行调整，这就要求在不中断其他效应器运动的情况下停止一个效应器。这种控制形式已通过选择性停止信号任务（SST）进行了研究，该任务要求抑制多成分动作中的一个效应器。这种选择性抑制形式被假设通过两步过程起作用，即首先进行临时全局抑制，使所有正在进行的运动反应失活，然后是重新启动过程，该过程仅重新激活正在运动的效应器。当发生这种抑制形式时，运动效应器的反应时间（RT）会承担先前全局抑制的代价。然而，对于这种代价是否以及如何延迟需要停止但错误移动的效应器的反应时间（停止错误试验），研究较少。在这里，我们测量了一组参与者的停止错误反应时间，这些参与者被指示在出现“开始信号”时同时转动手腕和抬起脚，并在出现“停止信号”时中断两个动作（非选择性停止版本）或仅中断其中一个动作（选择性停止版本）。我们在两种实验条件下呈现了这个任务，以评估不同的情境如何影响选择性停止版本中对运动效应器反应时间的可能的前瞻性抑制。在一种情境中，我们通过在同一试验块中呈现相同的选择性或非选择性停止版本，提供了要被抑制的效应器的预先信息。在另一种情境中，在不提供要停止的效应器的预先信息的情况下，将选择性和非选择性停止版本混合在一起，并且在停止信号呈现时提供关于要停止的效应器的信息。我们检测到正确和错误选择性停止反应时间都存在代价，且这种代价受不同任务条件的影响。我们在与SST相关的竞争模型框架内讨论了结果，以及它与为该范式的选择性版本开发的重新启动模型的关系。
