» Articles » PMID: 32127632

Low and High Stimulation Frequencies Differentially Affect Automated Response Selection in the Superior Parietal Cortex - Implications for Somatosensory Area Processes

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2020 Mar 5
PMID 32127632
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Response inhibition as a central facet of executive functioning is no homogeneous construct. Interference inhibition constitutes a subcomponent of response inhibition and refers to inhibitory control over responses that are automatically triggered by irrelevant stimulus dimensions as measured by the Simon task. While there is evidence that the area-specific modulation of tactile information affects the act of action withholding, effects in the context of interference inhibition remain elusive. We conducted a tactile version of the Simon task with stimuli designed to be predominantly processed in the primary (40 Hz) or secondary (150 Hz) somatosensory cortex. On the basis of EEG recordings, we performed signal decomposition and source localization. Behavioral results reveal that response execution is more efficient when sensory information is mainly processed via SII, compared to SI sensory areas during non-conflicting trials. When accounting for intermingled coding levels by temporally decomposing EEG data, the results show that experimental variations depending on sensory area-specific processing differences specifically affect motor and not sensory processes. Modulations of motor-related processes are linked to activation differences in the superior parietal cortex (BA7). It is concluded that the SII cortical area supporting cognitive preprocessing of tactile input fosters automatic tactile information processing by facilitating stimulus-response mapping in posterior parietal regions.

Citing Articles

Suggested visual blockade during hypnosis: Top-down modulation of stimulus processing in a visual oddball task.

Franz M, Schmidt B, Hecht H, Naumann E, Miltner W PLoS One. 2021; 16(9):e0257380.

PMID: 34525129 PMC: 8443036. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257380.


Perception-action integration in young age-A cross-sectional EEG study.

Dilcher R, Beste C, Takacs A, Bluschke A, Toth-Faber E, Kleimaker M Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2021; 50:100977.

PMID: 34147987 PMC: 8225655. DOI: 10.1016/j.dcn.2021.100977.


Neurophysiological correlates of perception-action binding in the somatosensory system.

Friedrich J, Verrel J, Kleimaker M, Munchau A, Beste C, Baumer T Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):14794.

PMID: 32908197 PMC: 7481208. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-71779-0.

References
1.
Diamond A . Executive functions. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012; 64:135-68. PMC: 4084861. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750. View

2.
Miyake A, Friedman N, Emerson M, Witzki A, Howerter A, Wager T . The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "Frontal Lobe" tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol. 2000; 41(1):49-100. DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734. View

3.
Sebastian A, Pohl M, Kloppel S, Feige B, Lange T, Stahl C . Disentangling common and specific neural subprocesses of response inhibition. Neuroimage. 2012; 64:601-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.020. View

4.
Sebastian A, Forstmann B, Matzke D . Towards a model-based cognitive neuroscience of stopping - a neuroimaging perspective. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018; 90:130-136. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.04.011. View

5.
Bodmer B, Beste C . On the dependence of response inhibition processes on sensory modality. Hum Brain Mapp. 2017; 38(4):1941-1951. PMC: 6866904. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23495. View