Automatic and voluntary motor inhibition: Intact processes for tic suppression?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 1667-1669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Francisco Martin-Rodríguez ◽  
Pablo Mir
Keyword(s):  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Voluntary Motor ◽  
Tic Suppression

scholarly journals Impaired automatic but intact volitional inhibition in primary tic disorders

Brain ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 906-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Rawji ◽  
Sachin Modi ◽  
Anna Latorre ◽  
Lorenzo Rocchi ◽  
Leanne Hockey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Masked Priming ◽  
Tic Disorders ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Movement Preparation ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Priming Task ◽  
Tic Suppression ◽  
Initial Excitation ◽  
Tic Severity ◽  
Healthy Control

Abstract The defining character of tics is that they can be transiently suppressed by volitional effort of will, and at a behavioural level this has led to the concept that tics result from a failure of inhibition. However, this logic conflates the mechanism responsible for the production of tics with that used in suppressing them. Volitional inhibition of motor output could be increased to prevent the tic from reaching the threshold for expression, although this has been extensively investigated with conflicting results. Alternatively, automatic inhibition could prevent the initial excitation of the striatal tic focus—a hypothesis we have previously introduced. To reconcile these competing hypotheses, we examined different types of motor inhibition in a group of 19 patients with primary tic disorders and 15 healthy volunteers. We probed proactive and reactive inhibition using the conditional stop-signal task, and applied transcranial magnetic stimulation to the motor cortex, to assess movement preparation and execution. We assessed automatic motor inhibition with the masked priming task. We found that volitional movement preparation, execution and inhibition (proactive and reactive) were not impaired in tic disorders. We speculate that these mechanisms are recruited during volitional tic suppression, and that they prevent expression of the tic by inhibiting the nascent excitation released by the tic generator. In contrast, automatic inhibition was abnormal/impaired in patients with tic disorders. In the masked priming task, positive and negative compatibility effects were found for healthy controls, whereas patients with tics exhibited strong positive compatibility effects, but no negative compatibility effect indicative of impaired automatic inhibition. Patients also made more errors on the masked priming task than healthy control subjects and the types of errors were consistent with impaired automatic inhibition. Errors associated with impaired automatic inhibition were positively correlated with tic severity. We conclude that voluntary movement preparation/generation and volitional inhibition are normal in tic disorders, whereas automatic inhibition is impaired—a deficit that correlated with tic severity and thus may constitute a potential mechanism by which tics are generated.

scholarly journals Using voluntary motor commands to inhibit involuntary arm movements

2014 ◽  
Vol 281 (1794) ◽  
pp. 20141139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arko Ghosh ◽  
John Rothwell ◽  
Patrick Haggard
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Silent Period ◽  
Neural Mechanism ◽  
Deltoid Muscle ◽  
Motor Command ◽  
Blind Spot ◽  
Neural Function ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Voluntary Motor ◽  
Motor Commands

A hallmark of voluntary motor control is the ability to stop an ongoing movement. Is voluntary motor inhibition a general neural mechanism that can be focused on any movement, including involuntary movements, or is it mere termination of a positive voluntary motor command? The involuntary arm lift, or ‘floating arm trick’, is a distinctive long-lasting reflex of the deltoid muscle. We investigated how a voluntary motor network inhibits this form of involuntary motor control. Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex during the floating arm trick produced a silent period in the reflexively contracting deltoid muscle, followed by a rebound of muscle activity. This pattern suggests a persistent generator of involuntary motor commands. Instructions to bring the arm down voluntarily reduced activity of deltoid muscle. When this voluntary effort was withdrawn, the involuntary arm lift resumed. Further, voluntary motor inhibition produced a strange illusion of physical resistance to bringing the arm down, as if ongoing involuntarily generated commands were located in a ‘sensory blind-spot’, inaccessible to conscious perception. Our results suggest that voluntary motor inhibition may be a specific neural function, distinct from absence of positive voluntary motor commands.

scholarly journals Cortical mechanisms of unilateral voluntary motor inhibition in humans

2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 428-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahamina Begum ◽  
Tatsuya Mima ◽  
Tatsuhide Oga ◽  
Hidemi Hara ◽  
Takeshi Satow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Voluntary Motor

scholarly journals Is motor inhibition involved in the processing of sentential negation? An assessment via the Stop-Signal Task

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Montalti ◽  
Marta Calbi ◽  
Valentina Cuccio ◽  
Maria Alessandra Umiltà ◽  
Vittorio Gallese
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Good Tool ◽  
Scientific Debate ◽  
Sentential Negation ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Methodological Considerations

AbstractIn the last decades, the embodied approach to cognition and language gained momentum in the scientific debate, leading to evidence in different aspects of language processing. However, while the bodily grounding of concrete concepts seems to be relatively not controversial, abstract aspects, like the negation logical operator, are still today one of the main challenges for this research paradigm. In this framework, the present study has a twofold aim: (1) to assess whether mechanisms for motor inhibition underpin the processing of sentential negation, thus, providing evidence for a bodily grounding of this logic operator, (2) to determine whether the Stop-Signal Task, which has been used to investigate motor inhibition, could represent a good tool to explore this issue. Twenty-three participants were recruited in this experiment. Ten hand-action-related sentences, both in affirmative and negative polarity, were presented on a screen. Participants were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible to the direction of the Go Stimulus (an arrow) and to withhold their response when they heard a sound following the arrow. This paradigm allows estimating the Stop Signal Reaction Time (SSRT), a covert reaction time underlying the inhibitory process. Our results show that the SSRT measured after reading negative sentences are longer than after reading affirmative ones, highlighting the recruitment of inhibitory mechanisms while processing negative sentences. Furthermore, our methodological considerations suggest that the Stop-Signal Task is a good paradigm to assess motor inhibition’s role in the processing of sentence negation.

Inhibitory Control of Adjacent Finger Movements while Performing a Modified Version of the Halstead Finger Tapping Test: Effects of Age, Education and Sex

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
George P. Prigatano ◽  
Sandro Barbosa de Oliveira ◽  
Carlos Wellington Passos Goncalves ◽  
Sheila Marques Denucci ◽  
Roberta Monteiro Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
College Education ◽  
Healthy Adults ◽  
Finger Tapping ◽  
Dominant Hand ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
Finger Movements ◽  
Diagnostic Significance ◽  
Finger Tapping Test ◽  
Study Participants

Abstract Objective: Selective motor inhibition is known to decline with age. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of failures at inhibitory control of adjacent finger movements while performing a repetitive finger tapping task in young, middle-aged and older adults. Potential education and sex effects were also evaluated. Methods: Kinematic recordings of adjacent finger movements were obtained on 107 healthy adults (ages 20–80) while they performed a modified version of the Halstead Finger Tapping Test (HTFF). Study participants were instructed to inhibit all finger movements while tapping with the index finger. Results: Inability to inhibit adjacent finger movements while performing the task was infrequent in young adults (2.9% of individuals between 20 and 39 years of age) but increased with age (23.3% between the ages of 40 and 59; 31.0% between ages 60 and 80). Females and males did not differ in their inability to inhibit adjacent finger movements, but individuals with a college education showed a lower frequency of failure to inhibit adjacent finger movements (10.3%) compared to those with a high school education (28.6%). These findings were statistically significant only for the dominant hand. Conclusion: Selective motor inhibition failures are most common in the dominant hand and occur primarily in older healthy adults while performing the modified version of the HFTT. Monitoring selective motor inhibition failures may have diagnostic significance.

scholarly journals The influence of associative reward learning on motor inhibition

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janina Rebecca Marchner ◽  
Claudia Preuschhof
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Action Control ◽  
Reward Learning ◽  
Behavioural Activation ◽  
Motor Inhibition ◽  
A Value ◽  
Directed Action ◽  
History Of ◽  
Pavlovian Learning ◽  
Subsequent Task

AbstractStimuli that predict a rewarding outcome can cause difficulties to inhibit unfavourable behaviour. Research suggests that this is also the case for stimuli with a history of reward extending these effects on action control to situations, where reward is no longer accessible. We expand this line of research by investigating if previously reward-predictive stimuli promote behavioural activation and impair motor inhibition in a second unrelated task. In two experiments participants were trained to associate colours with a monetary reward or neutral feedback. Afterwards participants performed a cued go/no-go task, where cues appeared in the colours previously associated with feedback during training. In both experiments training resulted in faster responses in rewarded trials providing evidence of a value-driven response bias as long as reward was accessible. However, stimuli with a history of reward did not interfere with goal-directed action and inhibition in a subsequent task after removal of the reward incentives. While the first experiment was not conclusive regarding an impact of reward-associated cues on response inhibition, the second experiment, validated by Bayesian statistics, clearly questioned an effect of reward history on inhibitory control. This stands in contrast to earlier findings suggesting that the effect of reward history on subsequent action control is not as consistent as previously assumed. Our results show that participants are able to overcome influences from Pavlovian learning in a simple inhibition task. We discuss our findings with respect to features of the experimental design which may help or complicate overcoming behavioural biases induced by reward history.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document