A Single Mechanism for Global and Selective Response Inhibition under the Influence of Motor Preparation

Raud, Liisa; Huster, René J.; Ivry, Richard B; Labruna, Ludovica; Messel, Mari Sælid; Greenhouse, Ian

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0607-20.2020

Cited by 36 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This confirms that β-bursts may reflect a general signature of a net-inhibited motor system, which has to be overcome to initiate a movement (Pfurtscheller et al, 1997). Moreover, it speaks toward recent conceptualizations of motor inhibition as a generic, universal mechanism that is involved in movement planning, with the degree of its deployment depending on-among other things-proactive control settings (Raud et al, 2020;Greenhouse, Sias, Labruna, & Ivry, 2015). Second, adjustments to proactive inhibitory control resulted in an increase of sensorimotor burst rates both before and after a signal to initiate a movement.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Adjustments to Proactive Motor Inhibition without Effector-Specific Foreknowledge Are Reflected in a Bilateral Upregulation of Sensorimotor β-Burst Rates

Soh

Hynd

Rangel

et al. 2021

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classic work using the stop-signal task has shown that humans can use inhibitory control to cancel already initiated movements. Subsequent work revealed that inhibitory control can be proactively recruited in anticipation of a potential stop-signal, thereby increasing the likelihood of successful movement cancellation. However, the exact neurophysiological effects of proactive inhibitory control on the motor system are still unclear. On the basis of classic views of sensorimotor β-band activity, as well as recent findings demonstrating the burst-like nature of this signal, we recently proposed that proactive inhibitory control is implemented by influencing the rate of sensorimotor β-bursts during movement initiation. Here, we directly tested this hypothesis using scalp EEG recordings of β-band activity in 41 healthy human adults during a bimanual RT task. By comparing motor responses made in two different contexts—during blocks with or without stop-signals—we found that premovement β-burst rates over both contralateral and ipsilateral sensorimotor areas were increased in stop-signal blocks compared to pure-go blocks. Moreover, the degree of this burst rate difference indexed the behavioral implementation of proactive inhibition (i.e., the degree of anticipatory response slowing in the stop-signal blocks). Finally, exploratory analyses showed that these condition differences were explained by a significant increase in β bursting that was already present during the premovement baseline period in stop blocks. Together, this suggests that the strategic deployment of proactive inhibitory motor control is implemented by upregulating the tonic inhibition of the motor system, signified by increased sensorimotor β-bursting both before and after signals to initiate a movement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Adjustments to Proactive Motor Inhibition without Effector-Specific Foreknowledge Are Reflected in a Bilateral Upregulation of Sensorimotor β-Burst Rates

Soh

Hynd

Rangel

et al. 2021

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent studies have also substantiated the existence of a ballistic stage in countermanding tasks. Muscle activity decreases ~60 ms prior to the behavioral measure of stopping latency (SSRT) suggesting that this time interval reflects a ballistic stage during which the inhibitory process cannot intervene and stop the response [58][59][60]. Such an architecture also resolves the paradox of different TSRTs for the eye and hand in the coordinated condition.…”

Section: A Ballistic Stage Explains Redirect Behavior For Coordinatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computational Architecture Mediating Inhibitory Control of Coordinated Eye-Hand Movements

Jana¹,

Gopal²,

Murthy³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant progress has been made in understanding the computational and neural architecture that mediates eye and hand movements made in isolation. However, less is known about the mechanisms that control these movements when they are coordinated. Here, we outline our computational approaches using accumulation-to-threshold and race-to-threshold models to elucidate the mechanisms that initiate and inhibit these movements. We suggest that, depending on the behavioral context, the initiation and inhibition of coordinated eye-hand movements can operate in two modes- coupled and decoupled. The coupled-mode operates when the task context requires a tight coupling between the effectors; a common command initiates both effectors, and a unitary inhibitory process is responsible for stopping them. Conversely, the decoupled mode operates when the task context demands weaker coupling between the effectors; separate commands initiate the eye and hand, and separate inhibitory processes are responsible for stopping them. We hypothesize that higher-order control processes assess the behavioral context and choose the most appropriate mode. This computational architecture can explain heterogeneous results observed across many studies that have investigated the control of coordinated eye-hand movements and may also serve as a general framework to understand the control of complex multi-effector movements.

show abstract

“…Recent studies have also provided additional evidence in favor of the existence of a ballistic stage in manual responses. Muscle activity decreases ~60 ms prior to the behavioral measure of the stopping latency (SSRT), suggesting that this time interval may reflect a ballistic stage during which the inhibitory process cannot intervene and stop the response [ 69 , 70 , 71 ]. Such a mechanism also resolves the paradox of different TSRTs for the eye and hand in the coordinated condition.…”

Section: A Ballistic Stage Explains Redirect Behavior For Coordinated Eye–hand Movementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such stopping is slower and more effortful. This stopping is thought to be mediated by the slower indirect pathway of the basal ganglia [ 88 ], and in this case, decreased MEP is seen only in the muscle that has to be inhibited [ 84 , 89 ] (see [ 71 ]). These neural mechanisms fit our conclusions derived from behavioral studies.…”

Section: Parallels Between Common and Separate Stops And Global And Selective Stoppingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computational Mechanisms Mediating Inhibitory Control of Coordinated Eye-Hand Movements

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant progress has been made in understanding the computational and neural mechanisms that mediate eye and hand movements made in isolation. However, less is known about the mechanisms that control these movements when they are coordinated. Here, we outline our computational approaches using accumulation-to-threshold and race-to-threshold models to elucidate the mechanisms that initiate and inhibit these movements. We suggest that, depending on the behavioral context, the initiation and inhibition of coordinated eye-hand movements can operate in two modes—coupled and decoupled. The coupled mode operates when the task context requires a tight coupling between the effectors; a common command initiates both effectors, and a unitary inhibitory process is responsible for stopping them. Conversely, the decoupled mode operates when the task context demands weaker coupling between the effectors; separate commands initiate the eye and hand, and separate inhibitory processes are responsible for stopping them. We hypothesize that the higher-order control processes assess the behavioral context and choose the most appropriate mode. This computational mechanism can explain the heterogeneous results observed across many studies that have investigated the control of coordinated eye-hand movements and may also serve as a general framework to understand the control of complex multi-effector movements.

show abstract

A Single Mechanism for Global and Selective Response Inhibition under the Influence of Motor Preparation

Abstract: We thank Claudia Tischler and Vincent Ngo for their assistance during data collection, and Assaf Breska and Nicole Swann for their helpful comments..

Cited by 36 publications

References 79 publications

Adjustments to Proactive Motor Inhibition without Effector-Specific Foreknowledge Are Reflected in a Bilateral Upregulation of Sensorimotor β-Burst Rates

Adjustments to Proactive Motor Inhibition without Effector-Specific Foreknowledge Are Reflected in a Bilateral Upregulation of Sensorimotor β-Burst Rates

Computational Architecture Mediating Inhibitory Control of Coordinated Eye-Hand Movements

Computational Mechanisms Mediating Inhibitory Control of Coordinated Eye-Hand Movements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About