Evidence of enhancement of spatial attention during inhibition of a visuo-motor response

Maguire, R. Paul; Broerse, A.; Jong, de Bauke; Cornelissen, Frans W.; Meiners, Linda C.; Leenders, Klaus L.; Boer, den Johan

doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00402-6

Cited by 32 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A test of hemispheric asymmetry in the correlation further revealed left-hemispheric dominance. These results indicate that there exist neural substrates of response inhibition in the left hemisphere that are modulated by the efficiency, whereas in the right hemisphere there exist the well known neural substrates of response inhibition (Konishi et al, 1998;Garavan et al, 1999;Bunge et al, 2002;Horn et al, 2003;Maguire et al, 2003;Hester et al, 2004;Rubia et al, 2005;Vink et al, 2005;Li et al, 2006;Chikazoe et al, 2007;Morimoto et al, 2008;Nakata et al, 2008;Xue et al, 2008;Zheng et al, 2008;Leung, 2009, 2011a;Coxon et al, 2009;Roberts and Garavan, 2010 Activation maps are displayed as transverse sections and are overlaid on top of the anatomic image averaged across subjects. Statistical significance is indicated using the color scale at the bottom, and the transverse section level is indicated by the Z coordinates of Talairach space (Talairach and Tournoux, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Efficiency of Go/No-Go Task Performance Implemented in the Left Hemisphere

Hirose

Chikazoe

Watanabe

et al. 2012

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well known that the efficiency of response inhibition differs from person to person, but the neural mechanism that implements the efficiency is less understood. In the present fMRI study, we devised an index to evaluate the efficiency of response inhibition in the go/ no-go task, and investigated the neural correlates of the efficiency of response inhibition. The human subjects who perform the go/no-go task with a shorter reaction time in go trials (Go-RT) and with a higher percentage of correct no-go trials (Nogo-PC) are thought to have the ability to conduct response inhibition more efficiently. To quantify the efficiency, we defined an efficiency index as the difference in the Nogo-PC between each subject and an ordinarily efficient subject, under the same Go-RT. An across-subject correlation analysis revealed that the brain activity in multiple regions in the left frontal and parietal cortex positively correlated with the efficiency index. Moreover, a test of hemispheric asymmetry with regard to the across-subject correlation revealed left-hemispheric dominance. The significant correlation in the left frontal and parietal regions complements the results of previous studies that used the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), a well known index to evaluate the efficiency of response inhibition used in the stop-signal task. Our results also indicate that, although it is well known that the neural substrates for response inhibition common in a subject group exist dominantly in the right hemisphere, the neural substrates for efficiency exist dominantly in the left hemisphere.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Efficiency of Go/No-Go Task Performance Implemented in the Left Hemisphere

Hirose

Chikazoe

Watanabe

et al. 2012

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies using fMRI identified the neural networks associated with Go trials, including the DLPFC, VLPFC, SMA, PM, primary sensorimotor area (SMI), ACC, TPJ, temporal and parietal lobes, and thalamus (Konishi et al ., ; Menon et al ., ; Watanabe et al ., ; Maguire et al ., ; Nakata et al ., ,b,c). In addition, other previous studies reported No‐go‐related neural networks, including the DLPFC, VLPFC, SMA, ACC, IPL, insula and TPJ (Konishi et al ., ; Nakata et al ., ; Chikazoe et al ., ; Tabu et al ., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Temporal dynamics of neural activity in motor execution and inhibition processing

Nakata

Sakamoto

Honda

et al. 2015

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many neuroimaging studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging have shown the neuronal networks for motor execution and inhibition processing, the precise activation timing of each brain region is not yet well understood. In the present study, we investigated the temporal dynamics of neural activities in multiple brain regions using magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) simultaneously during somatosensory Go/No-go paradigms. The results of MEG showed that neural activities in the bilateral premotor area at approximately 150 ms and in the primary motor cortex at approximately 250 ms were only detected in Go trials, while brain responses in the bilateral prefrontal cortex at approximately 170 ms were only observed in No-go trials. In addition, the amplitudes of the N140 and P300 components in EEG was significantly larger in No-go trials than in Go trials, and the latencies of N140 and P300 were significantly later in No-go trials than in Go trials. Our results indicated the time courses of neural processing in response execution and inhibition processing, and revealed differences in their underlying neural mechanisms.

show abstract

“…Previous fMRI Go/NoGo studies (without any emotional component) have found task-related differences in or close to this region (Asahi et al, 2004;de Zubicaray et al, 2000;Fassbender et al, 2004;Garavan et al, 1999Garavan et al, , 2002Horn et al, 2003;Kelly et al, 2004;Konishi et al, 1999;Maguire et al, 2003;Menon et al, 2001;Mostofsky et al, 2003;Rubia et al, 2005;Wager et al, 2005;Watanabe et al, 2002). The angular gyrus has been implicated in many different functions including visual attention, resolution of conflict in stimulus-or response-related processing, semantic processing, number processing, default mode (resting state) processing, memory retrieval, and social cognition (Seghier, 2012).…”

Section: Interaction Of Go/nogo and Emotion Processing Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%