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.

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

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

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

Proactive Inhibitory Control of Response as the Default State of Executive Control

Failed stopping transiently suppresses the electromyogram in task-irrelevant muscles

Attentional bias on motor control: is motor inhibition influenced by attentional reorienting?

Efficacy of inhibitory control depends on procrastination and deceleration in saccade planning

A differential impact of action–effect temporal contiguity on different measures of response inhibition in the Go\No-Go and Stop-signal paradigms

Motor inhibition errors and interference suppression errors differ systematically on neural and behavioural features of response monitoring

Stopping Speed in Response to Auditory and Visual Stop Signals Depends on Go Signal Modality

Reduced Proactive Control Processes Associated with Behavioral Response Inhibition Deficits in Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Comparing anticipatory and stop-signal response inhibition with a novel, open-source selective stopping toolbox

Unravelling the dynamics of response force: Investigating motor restraint and motor cancellation through go/no-go and stop-signal tasks

Impaired motor inhibition during perceptual inhibition in older, but not younger adults: a psychophysiological study

Motor inhibition during voluntary gait initiation in young and older adults

Measuring the nonselective effects of motor inhibition using isometric force recordings

The effects of conscious movement investment on inhibiting a simple response

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

A unified account of simple and response-selective inhibition