Abstract:Background and Aims: Adaptive behavior depends on the ability to voluntarily suppress context-inappropriate behaviors, a process referred to as response inhibition. Stop Signal tests (SSTs) are the most frequently studied paradigm used to assess response inhibition. Previous studies of SSTs have indicated that inhibitory control behavior can be explained using a common model in which GO and STOP processes are initiated independent from one and another, and the process that is completed first determines whether the behavior is elicited (GO process) or terminated (STOP process). Consistent with this model, studies have indicated that individuals strategically delay their behaviors during SSTs in order to increase their stopping abilities. Despite being controlled by distinct neural systems, prior studies have largely documented similar inhibitory control performance across eye and hand movements. Though, no existing studies have compared the extent to which individuals strategically delay behavior across different effectors is not yet clear. Here, we compared the extent to which inhibitory control processes and the cognitive strategies that support them during oculomotor and manual motor behaviors. Methods: We examined 29 healthy individuals who performed parallel oculomotor and manual motor SSTs. Participants also completed a separate block of GO trials administered prior to the Stop Signal tests to assess baseline reaction times for each effector and reaction time increases during interleaved GO trials of the SST. Results: Our results showed that stopping errors increased for both effectors as the interval between GO and STOP cues was increased (i.e., stop signal delay), but performance deteriorated more rapidly for eye compared to hand movements with increases in stop signal delay. During GO trials, participants delayed the initiation of their responses for each effector, and greater slowing of reaction times on GO trials was associated with increased accuracy on STOP trials for both effectors. However, participants delayed their eye movements to a lesser degree than their hand movements, and strategic reaction time slowing was a stronger determinant of stopping accuracy for hand compared to eye movements. Overall, stopping accuracies for eye and hand movements were only modestly correlated, and the time it took individuals to cancel a response was not related for eye and hand movements. Discussion and Conclusion: Our findings that GO and STOP processes are independent and that individuals strategically delay their behavioral responses to increase stopping accuracy regardless of effector indicate that inhibitory control of oculomotor and manual motor behaviors both follow common guiding principles. Yet, our findings document that eye movements are more difficult to inhibit than hand movements, and the timing, magnitude, and impact of cognitive control strategies used to support voluntary response inhibition are less robust for eye compared to hand movements. This suggests that inhibitory control systems also show unique characteristics that are behavior-dependent. This conclusion is consistent with neurophysiological evidence showing important differences in the architecture and functional properties of the neural systems involved in inhibitory control of eye and hand movements. It also suggests that characterizing inhibitory control processes in health and disease requires effector-specific analysis.

Failed stopping transiently suppresses the electromyogram in task-irrelevant muscles

Early Rise and Persistent Inhibition of Electromyography during Failed Stopping

Measuring the nonselective effects of motor inhibition using isometric force recordings

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

Common and unique neurophysiological signatures for the stopping and revising of actions reveal the temporal dynamics of inhibitory control

Dual-Coil Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Reveals Temporal Dynamics of Bilateral Corticomotor Excitability During Response Inhibition

Selective cancellation of reactive or anticipated movements: Differences in speed of action reprogramming, but not stopping

Inhibitory Control Processes and the Strategies That Support Them During Hand and Eye Movements.

An exploration of complex action stopping across multiple datasets: Insights into the mechanisms of action cancellation and re-programming

The Strength of the Corticospinal Coherence Depends on the Predictability of Modulated Isometric Forces

Mesolimbic local field potentials are modulated by motor control

Motor inhibition parameters are reflected in the kinetic and kinematic of gait initiation in a step version of the Stop Signal Task

tDCS over the inferior frontal gyri and visual cortices did not improve response inhibition

On the Globality of Motor Suppression: Unexpected Events and Their Influence on Behavior and Cognition

Establishing a Right Frontal Beta Signature for Stopping Action in Scalp EEG: Implications for Testing Inhibitory Control in Other Task Contexts

A failure to stop and attention fluctuations: An evoked oscillations study of the stop-signal paradigm

Function of Striatum Beyond Inhibition and Execution of Motor Responses

Force monitoring reveals single trial dynamics of motor control in a stop signal task

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Functional Mri Reveal Cortical and Subcortical Interactions During Stop-Signal Response Inhibition

Inhibition of the supplementary motor area affects distribution of effort over time

Brain networks subserving fixed versus performance-adjusted delay stop trials in a stop signal task.