Visual salience of the stop-signal affects movement suppression process

Montanari, Roberto; Giamundo, Margherita; Brunamonti, Emiliano; Ferraina, Stefano; Pani, Pierpaolo

doi:10.1007/s00221-017-4961-0

Cited by 26 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They explained this finding in terms of central vs. peripheral focus of “attentional spot‐light” that facilitated detection of the stop‐signal. Further evidence that the visual salience and discriminability of the stop‐signal indeed modulate stopping performance support our findings (Montanari, Giamundo, Brunamonti, Ferraina, & Pani, ; van den Wildenberg & van der Molen, ). In experiment 3, even when orienting gaze was prohibited, subjects exhibited significant deficit in reporting the infrequent second target in the stream of letters about at the same delay.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Detectability of stop‐signal determines magnitude of deceleration in saccade planning

Indrajeet

Ray

2018

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An inhibitory control is exerted when the context in which a movement has been planned changes abruptly making the impending movement inappropriate. Neurons in the frontal eye field and superior colliculus steadily increase activity before a saccadic eye movement, but cease the rise below a threshold when an impending saccade is withheld in response to an unexpected stop‐signal. This type of neural modulation has been majorly considered as an outcome of a race between preparatory and inhibitory processes ramping up to reach a decision criterion. An alternative model claims that the rate of saccade planning is diminished exclusively when the stop‐signal is detected within a stipulated period. However, due to a dearth of empirical evidence in support of the latter model, it remains unclear how the detectability of the stop‐signal influences saccade inhibition. In our study, human participants selected a visual target to look at by discriminating a go‐cue. Infrequently they cancelled saccade and reported whether they saw the stop‐signal. The go‐cue and stop‐signal both were embedded in a stream of irrelevant stimuli presented in rapid succession. Participants exhibited difficulty in detection of the stop‐signal when presented almost immediately after the go‐cue. We found a robust relationship between the detectability of the stop‐signal and the odds of saccade inhibition. Saccade latency increased exponentially with the maximum time available for processing the stop‐signal before gaze shifted. A model in which the stop‐signal onset spontaneously decelerated progressive saccade planning with the magnitude proportional to its detectability accounted for the data.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Detectability of stop‐signal determines magnitude of deceleration in saccade planning

Indrajeet

Ray

2018

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here we found that, as in humans recently tested in the same task 39 , less salient stimuli deteriorate inhibitory performance and correspond to longer SSRT. These behavioural data were subtended by neural modulations in PMd, participating to action inhibition, that started later in time and showed a less steeper dynamic for stimuli difficult to be processed.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Another aspect of this study is that, from the behavioural point of view, performance in monkeys is very close to the performance observed in humans 39 suggesting that the same neural processes can be at play. This possibility is of particular importance when considering the application of basic neurophysiological knowledge to help clinical investigations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…The same type of Stop-signal has been obtained in studies aimed at investigating the neural correlates of arm movement inhibition 37,42 . At the same time behavioural studies have shown that sensory features of the Stop-signal or presence of distractors can affect inhibitory performance 39,44,45,46,47,48,49 . Furthermore simulation studies have investigated the role of the detection process in permitting the inhibition of saccades 50 and how response inhibition can result from blocking the input to the Go process thus avoiding its growth to generate the movement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visual salience of the stop-signal affects neural dynamics of controlled inhibition

Pani

Giarrocco

Giamundo

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The countermanding or stop-signal task is broadly used to evaluate response inhibition: it sporadically requires to inhibit a movement upon an incoming salient stop-signal.To study the neural basis of arm movements inhibition we combined the approach typically employed for the study of perceptual-decision making with the countermanding task, that is broadly used to evaluate response inhibition To this aim we modified the salience of the stop-signal and we found that this modulation affected the ability to inhibit in macaque monkeys: coherently to what already observed in humans, we found that less salient stimuli deteriorate inhibitory performance. These behavioural results were subtended by neural modulations representing an inhibitory process that started later in time and showed a less steeper dynamic for stimuli difficult to be processed.This study shows that the neural patterns observed when deciding to stop are broadly similar to the neural patterns observed when deciding to act in the literature; thus it is a first step in investigating the perceptual decision making process involved in movement inhibition.

show abstract

“…This suggests that potential stopping markers could be sensitive to variations in processing stages preceding inhibition, a notion which has been supported by recent computational work 22,23 . In fact, several studies show that sensory, attentional and perceptual processes all play into inhibitory performance in the SST [24][25][26][27] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulating stopping? Investigating the effects of tDCS over the inferior frontal gyri and visual cortices

Thunberg

Messel

Raud

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to cancel an already initiated response is central to flexible behavior. While several different behavioral and neural markers have been suggested to quantify the latency of the stopping process, it remains unclear if they quantify the stopping process itself, or other supporting mechanisms such as visual and/or attentional processing. The present study sought to investigate the contributions of inhibitory and sensory processes to stopping latency markers by combining transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), electroencephalography (EEG) and electromyography (EMG) recordings in a within-subject design. Active and sham tDCS were applied over the inferior frontal gyri (IFG) and visual cortices (VC), combined with both online and offline EEG and EMG recordings. We found evidence that neither of the active tDCS condition affected stopping latencies relative to sham stimulation. Our results challenge previous findings suggesting that anodal tDCS over the IFG can reduce stopping latency and demonstrates the necessity of adequate control conditions in tDCS research.Additionally, while the different putative markers of stopping latency showed generally positive correlations with each other, they also showed substantial variation in the estimated latency of inhibition, making it unlikely that they all capture the same construct exclusively.

show abstract

Visual salience of the stop-signal affects movement suppression process

Cited by 26 publications

References 64 publications

Detectability of stop‐signal determines magnitude of deceleration in saccade planning

Detectability of stop‐signal determines magnitude of deceleration in saccade planning

Visual salience of the stop-signal affects neural dynamics of controlled inhibition

Stimulating stopping? Investigating the effects of tDCS over the inferior frontal gyri and visual cortices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About