Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (Feb 2023)

Restart errors reaction time of a two-step inhibition process account for the violation of the race model’s independence in multi-effector selective stop signal task

  • Isabel Beatrice Marc,
  • Isabel Beatrice Marc,
  • Valentina Giuffrida,
  • Valentina Giuffrida,
  • Surabhi Ramawat,
  • Lorenzo Fiori,
  • Lorenzo Fiori,
  • Lorenzo Fiori,
  • Roberto Fontana,
  • Giampiero Bardella,
  • Sabrina Fagioli,
  • Stefano Ferraina,
  • Pierpaolo Pani,
  • Emiliano Brunamonti

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1106298
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17

Abstract

Read online

Goal-oriented actions often require the coordinated movement of two or more effectors. Sometimes multi-effector movements need to be adjusted according to a continuously changing environment, requiring stopping an effector without interrupting the movement of the others. This form of control has been investigated by the selective Stop Signal Task (SST), requiring the inhibition of an effector of a multicomponent action. This form of selective inhibition has been hypothesized to act through a two-step process, where a temporary global inhibition deactivating all the ongoing motor responses is followed by a restarting process that reactivates only the moving effector. When this form of inhibition takes place, the reaction time (RT) of the moving effector pays the cost of the previous global inhibition. However, it is poorly investigated if and how this cost delays the RT of the effector that was required to be stopped but was erroneously moved (Stop Error trials). Here we measure the Stop Error RT in a group of participants instructed to simultaneously rotate the wrist and lift the foot when a Go Signal occurred, and interrupt both movements (non-selective Stop version) or only one of them (selective Stop version) when a Stop Signal was presented. We presented this task in two experimental conditions to evaluate how different contexts can influence a possible proactive inhibition on the RT of the moving effector in the selective Stop versions. In one context, we provided the foreknowledge of the effector to be inhibited by presenting the same selective or non-selective Stop versions in the same block of trials. In a different context, while providing no foreknowledge of the effector(s) to be stopped, the selective and non-selective Stop versions were intermingled, and the information on the effector to be stopped was delivered at the time of the Stop Signal presentation. We detected a cost in both Correct and Error selective Stop RTs that was influenced by the different task conditions. Results are discussed within the framework of the race model related to the SST, and its relationship with a restart model developed for selective versions of this paradigm.

Keywords