» Articles » PMID: 28390090

Prepotent Motor Activity and Inhibitory Control Demands in Different Variants of the Go/no-go Paradigm

Overview
Specialty Psychiatry
Date 2017 Apr 9
PMID 28390090
Citations 90
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Inhibitory control enables humans to stop prepotent motor activity, and is commonly studied using go/no-go or stop-signal tasks. In stop-signal tasks, prepotent motor activity is elicited by delaying stop signals relative to go signals. In go/no-go tasks, however, trials include only one signal-go or no-go. Hence, prepotent motor activity has to be ensured differently-for example, by using rare no-go trials and short trial durations. However, a literature survey shows that ∼40% of studies use equiprobable go/no-go trials and ∼20% use long stimulus-stimulus intervals (> 4 s). It is unclear whether such slow-paced, equiprobable go/no-go tasks elicit prepotent motor activity and probe inhibitory control. We recorded EEG during four go/no-go tasks, varying in no-go probability and trial duration. We quantified prepotent motor activity on successfully inhibited no-go trials using the lateralized readiness potential. Only fast-paced go/no-go tasks with rare no-go trials reliably evoked such activity. We then used a stop-signal task and independent component analysis to isolate an established neural signature of inhibitory control, and investigated this signature's activity across the go/no-go tasks. Across tasks, increased prepotent motor activity on individual no-go trials was accompanied by greater frontocentral P3 amplitudes, confirming it as an index of inhibition. Crucially, this inhibition-related activity showed a 75% reduction in slow-paced, equiprobable go/no-go tasks compared to fast-paced, rare no-go versions. Therefore, since many common go/no-go task configurations do not reliably evoke prepotent motor activity, their inhibitory requirements are greatly reduced. This has major implications for the usage of go/no-go tasks in psychological experiments.

Citing Articles

Dynamic modulations of effective brain connectivity associated with postural instability during multi-joint compound movement on compliant surface.

Lehmann T, Visser A, Havers T, Buchel D, Baumeister J Exp Brain Res. 2025; 243(4):80.

PMID: 40029432 PMC: 11876271. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-025-07039-2.


A preparatory cranial potential for saccadic eye movements in macaque monkeys.

Errington S, Schall J bioRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 39868325 PMC: 11761097. DOI: 10.1101/2025.01.16.633363.


Acute effects of virtual reality exercise bike games on psychophysiological outcomes in college North-African adolescents with cerebral palsy: A randomized clinical trial.

Soudani M, Farhat F, Ghram A, Ben Saad H, Chlif M F1000Res. 2025; 12():1597.

PMID: 39834874 PMC: 11745216. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.143189.2.


How Do Common Marmosets Maintain the Balance Between Response Execution and Action Inhibition?.

Samandra R, Rosa M, Mansouri F Am J Primatol. 2025; 87(1):e23717.

PMID: 39783787 PMC: 11714342. DOI: 10.1002/ajp.23717.


Does the stop-signal P3 reflect inhibitory control?.

Hervault M, Soh C, Wessel J Cortex. 2025; 183:232-250.

PMID: 39754857 PMC: 11839379. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2024.12.005.