» Articles » PMID: 32948892

Non-selective Inhibition of the Motor System Following Unexpected and Expected Infrequent Events

Overview
Journal Exp Brain Res
Specialty Neurology
Date 2020 Sep 19
PMID 32948892
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Motor inhibition is a key control mechanism that allows humans to rapidly adapt their actions in response to environmental events. One of the hallmark signatures of rapidly exerted, reactive motor inhibition is the non-selective suppression of cortico-spinal excitability (CSE): unexpected sensory stimuli lead to a suppression of CSE across the entire motor system, even in muscles that are inactive. Theories suggest that this reflects a fast, automatic, and broad engagement of inhibitory control, which facilitates behavioral adaptations to unexpected changes in the sensory environment. However, it is an open question whether such non-selective CSE suppression is truly due to the unexpected nature of the sensory event, or whether it is sufficient for an event to be merely infrequent (but not unexpected). Here, we report data from two experiments in which human subjects experienced both unexpected and expected infrequent events during a two-alternative forced-choice reaction time task while CSE was measured from a task-unrelated muscle. We found that expected infrequent events can indeed produce non-selective CSE suppression-but only when they occur during movement initiation. In contrast, unexpected infrequent events produce non-selective CSE suppression relative to frequent, expected events even in the absence of movement initiation. Moreover, CSE suppression due to unexpected events occurs at shorter latencies compared to expected infrequent events. These findings demonstrate that unexpectedness and stimulus infrequency have qualitatively different suppressive effects on the motor system. They also have key implications for studies that seek to disentangle neural and psychological processes related to motor inhibition and stimulus detection.

Citing Articles

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.


Unexpected sounds induce a rapid inhibition of eye-movement responses.

Vasilev M, Ozkan Z, Kirkby J, Nuthmann A, Parmentier F Psychophysiology. 2024; 62(1):e14728.

PMID: 39690142 PMC: 11652409. DOI: 10.1111/psyp.14728.


Distraction by unexpected sounds: comparing response repetition and response switching.

Garcia-Lopez E, Parmentier F Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1451008.

PMID: 39417033 PMC: 11480036. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1451008.


Examining motor evidence for the pause-then-cancel model of action-stopping: insights from motor system physiology.

Tatz J, Carlson M, Lovig C, Wessel J J Neurophysiol. 2024; 132(5):1589-1607.

PMID: 39412561 PMC: 11573278. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00048.2024.


Examining motor evidence for the pause-then-cancel model of action-stopping: Insights from motor system physiology.

Tatz J, Carlson M, Lovig C, Wessel J bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38352621 PMC: 10862812. DOI: 10.1101/2024.01.30.577976.


References
1.
Dykstra T, Waller D, Hazeltine E, Wessel J . Leveling the Field for a Fairer Race between Going and Stopping: Neural Evidence for the Race Model of Motor Inhibition from a New Version of the Stop Signal Task. J Cogn Neurosci. 2019; 32(4):590-602. PMC: 7667712. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01503. View

2.
Duque J, Greenhouse I, Labruna L, Ivry R . Physiological Markers of Motor Inhibition during Human Behavior. Trends Neurosci. 2017; 40(4):219-236. PMC: 5389740. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2017.02.006. View

3.
Elchlepp H, Lavric A, Chambers C, Verbruggen F . Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account. Cogn Psychol. 2016; 86:27-61. PMC: 4825542. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.01.004. View

4.
Verbruggen F, Logan G . Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009; 35(3):835-54. PMC: 2690716. DOI: 10.1037/a0012726. View

5.
Cohen N, Cross E, Tunik E, Grafton S, Culham J . Ventral and dorsal stream contributions to the online control of immediate and delayed grasping: a TMS approach. Neuropsychologia. 2009; 47(6):1553-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.12.034. View