Plastic modifications within inhibitory control networks induced by practicing a stop-signal task: An electrical neuroimaging study

Manuel, Aurélie L.; Bernasconi, Fosco; Spierer, Lucas

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.12.009

Cited by 68 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with previous reports, we assume that the participants managed to decrease their RT to Go trials because they became faster at inhibiting their responses when unexpected NoGo stimuli were presented (Manuel et al 2010;Verbruggen et al 2012;Manuel et al 2013;White et al 2014). According to this hypothesis, IC proficiency was achieved via a speeding up of inhibition processes, but manifested as decreased RTs to Go trials with no change in false alarms rate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

“…10-15 h in Thorell et al 2009;Johnstone et al 2012;Berkman et al 2014;Chavan et al 2015). For example, training IC with stop-signal tasks (SST) or Go/ NoGo tasks has been found to decrease stop-signal reaction times (SSRT; Guerrieri et al 2012;Manuel et al 2013), or to decrease false alarm rate and/or response time in the trained task, respectively (Schapkin et al 2007;Manuel et al 2010;Johnstone et al 2012;Benikos et al 2013). A few studies, however, did not find such a decrease (e.g., Cohen and Poldrack, 2008), or only in some conditions (Ditye et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Functional neuroimaging studies revealed that traininginduced improvements in IC were supported by plastic modifications within the cortico-subcortical inhibitory control brain network (inferior frontal gyri, pre-supplementary motor area and basal ganglia; IFG, SMA, and BG, respectively; Manuel et al 2013;Berkman et al 2014;Chavan et al 2015) according to two distinct, non-exclusive neurocognitive mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inhibitory control (IC), the ability to suppress ongoing or planned cognitive or motor processes, can be improved with short-(50 min in Verbruggen and Logan 2008;Manuel et al 2010;Manuel et al 2013) to medium-term training (ca. 10-15 h in Thorell et al 2009;Johnstone et al 2012;Berkman et al 2014;Chavan et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Enhancing frontal top-down inhibitory control with Go/NoGo training

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whether and how the capacity to inhibit cognitive and motor processes can be trained and the underlying neuroplastic mechanisms remain unclear. Using electrical neuroimaging methods, we investigated how inhibitory control training regimens can be designed to enhance frontal top-down inhibition processes. We trained participants with a Go/NoGo task in which the stimulusresponse mapping rules were systematically varied. This task parameter has indeed be hypothesized to determine the extent to which top-down frontal inhibition processes are involved and thus ultimately reinforced during the training. The effects of training on inhibitory control were assessed by analyzing the event-related potentials (ERPs) measured during the Go/NoGo task with a data-driven time-and electrode-wise 2 9 2 ANOVA with factors Session (beginning; end of the training) and Stimuli (Go; NoGo). To localize the sources of the ERP effects in the brain, the same statistical design was applied to distributed electrical source estimations averaged over the periods of ERP modulations. The training improved inhibitory control performance. Electrophysiologically, we found a significant Session 9 Stimulus interaction at 300-400 ms poststimulus onset over centro-occipital electrodes. Statistical parametric mapping on the brain source estimations revealed an interaction within right inferior frontal cortices driven by a decrease in response strength to NoGo but not to Go trials in this region. Our collective results demonstrate that frontal top-down inhibition processes can be enhanced with specifically designed inhibitory control training regimens.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Enhancing frontal top-down inhibitory control with Go/NoGo training

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although several of these studies have failed to find a significant training-related improvement in inhibitory control ability after intensive training (Cohen & Poldrack, 2008;Enge et al, 2014), others have found decreases in SSRTs (Berkman, Kahn, & Merchant, 2014;Manuel, Bernasconi, & Spierer, 2013) or commission errors (i.e., correctly withholding a response on stop-signal trials) and Go RTs after training inhibitory control with go-nogo and stop-signal tasks (Benikos, Johnstone, & Roodenrys, 2013;Johnstone et al, 2012;Schapkin, Falkenstein, Marks, & Griefahn, 2007).…”

Section: Does Dual-task Training Transfer To Other Theoretically Relamentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting and inhibiting responses: Common cognitive and neural substrates?

Bender¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the brain receiving a constant influx of sensory information in ever-changing environments, humans are nonetheless able to flexibly guide their behaviour in accordance with higher goals and plans. The cognitive system achieves this by implementing executive control processes that monitor, regulate and alter the settings of lower level cognitive processes that are involved in analyzing incoming sensory information and executing motor plans. At the core of goal-directed behaviour are the abilities to select appropriate responses and inhibit planned actions in response to changes in the environment or internal states. While there have been considerable advancements made in understanding the behavioural and neural substrates of response selection and response inhibition, we currently know relatively little about the relationship and possible interplay between these two key cognitive operations. The experiments in this thesis investigate the behavioural and neural overlap in response selection and response inhibition processes by identifying the latent structure that underpins performance in a wide range of action control tasks, exploring the causal role of a brain region that has been implicated in both processes, and by inspecting the degree to which response selection training transfers to other response selection and inhibitory control tasks.Study 1 describes a behavioural study that employed an individual differences approach to investigate the underlying relationships across a battery of common response selection tasks (as measured by the psychological refractory period paradigm (PRP), single response selection task, and attentional blink (AB) task), and response inhibition tasks (as measured by the stop-signal task (SST), Go-Nogo tasks, Stroop, and Flanker task). In order to avoid task impurity and construct validity problems that can seriously undermine the utility of correlational and exploratory factor analytic studies, I used confirmatory factor analysis to statistically extract only what is common about the tasks.Using this approach, I found that response inhibition and response selection were separable, with SST and Go-Nogo task performance related to response inhibition, and the PRP, Stroop, Single Response Selection, and AB tasks related to response selection.These findings suggest that response selection and response inhibition reflect two distinct cognitive operations.As neurocognitive work has implicated the superior medial frontal cortex (SMFC) in both response selection and the proactive modulation of response tendencies when stopping is occasionally required (inhibitory response selection control), it suggests that the neural substrates for these two cognitive operations overlap in this brain region. In Response selection performance is typically compromised due to the processing limitations associated with cognitive control and decision-making when completing two tasks together relative to when completing the component tasks in isolation. While these multitasking performance decr...

show abstract

Differential patterns of functional and structural plasticity within and between inferior frontal gyri support training‐induced improvements in inhibitory control proficiency

Chavan

Mouthon

Draganski

et al. 2015

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ample evidence indicates that inhibitory control (IC), a key executive component referring to the ability to suppress cognitive or motor processes, relies on a right-lateralized fronto-basal brain network. However, whether and how IC can be improved with training and the underlying neuroplastic mechanisms remains largely unresolved. We used functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging to measure the effects of 2 weeks of training with a Go/NoGo task specifically designed to improve frontal top-down IC mechanisms. The training-induced behavioral improvements were accompanied by a decrease in neural activity to inhibition trials within the right pars opercularis and triangularis, and in the left pars orbitalis of the inferior frontal gyri. Analyses of changes in brain anatomy induced by the IC training revealed increases in grey matter volume in the right pars orbitalis and modulations of white matter microstructure in the right pars triangularis. The task-specificity of the effects of training was confirmed by an absence of change in neural activity to a control working memory task. Our combined anatomical and functional findings indicate that differential patterns of functional and structural plasticity between and within inferior frontal gyri enhanced the speed of topdown inhibition processes and in turn IC proficiency. The results suggest that training-based interventions might help overcoming the anatomic and functional deficits of inferior frontal gyri manifesting in inhibition-related clinical conditions. More generally, we demonstrate how multimodal neuroimaging Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article.

show abstract

Plastic modifications within inhibitory control networks induced by practicing a stop-signal task: An electrical neuroimaging study

Cited by 68 publications

References 57 publications

Enhancing frontal top-down inhibitory control with Go/NoGo training

Enhancing frontal top-down inhibitory control with Go/NoGo training

Selecting and inhibiting responses: Common cognitive and neural substrates?

Differential patterns of functional and structural plasticity within and between inferior frontal gyri support training‐induced improvements in inhibitory control proficiency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About