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.

Measuring the nonselective effects of motor inhibition using isometric force recordings

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

Failed stopping transiently suppresses the electromyogram in task-irrelevant muscles

Effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on reactive response inhibition

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

Cerebellar Control on Prefrontal-Motor Connectivity During Movement Inhibition

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

Inhibitory control elicited by physical activity and inactivity stimuli: an EEG study

Early Rise and Persistent Inhibition of Electromyography during Failed Stopping

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

Are ipsilateral motor evoked potentials subject to intracortical inhibition?

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

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

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

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

Corticospinal activity evoked and modulated by non-invasive stimulation of the intact human motor cortex

Inhibitory Effect of Subthreshold TMS on the Long-Latency Response in the Flexor Carpi Radialis

Short intracortical facilitation associates with motor-inhibitory control

Modulation of motor cortex inhibition during manual dexterity tasks: an adaptive threshold hunting study

Corticospinal excitability reductions during action preparation and action stopping in humans: Different sides of the same inhibitory coin?

Mesolimbic local field potentials are modulated by motor control