scholarly journals On the Existential Significance of ‘Readiness Potentials’

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 204
Author(s):  
Shiva Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Readiness Potentials

scholarly journals Veto and Vacillation: A Neural Precursor of the Decision to Withhold Action

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erman Misirlisoy ◽  
Patrick Haggard
Keyword(s):  
Human Behavior ◽  
Temporal Pattern ◽  
Neural Precursor ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Action Sequences ◽  
Readiness Potentials ◽  
Preparatory Activity ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Motor Areas

The capacity to inhibit a planned action gives human behavior its characteristic flexibility. How this mechanism operates and what factors influence a decision to act or not act remain relatively unexplored. We used EEG readiness potentials (RPs) to examine preparatory activity before each action of an ongoing sequence, in which one action was occasionally omitted. We compared RPs between sequences in which omissions were instructed by a rule (e.g., “omit every fourth action”) and sequences in which the participant themselves freely decided which action to omit. RP amplitude was reduced for actions that immediately preceded a voluntary omission but not a rule-based omission. We also used the regular temporal pattern of the action sequences to explore brain processes linked to omitting an action by time-locking EEG averages to the inferred time when an action would have occurred had it not been omitted. When omissions were instructed by a rule, there was a negative-going trend in the EEG, recalling the rising ramp of an RP. No such component was found for voluntary omissions. The results are consistent with a model in which spontaneously fluctuating activity in motor areas of the brain could bias “free” decisions to act or not.

Global precedence and response activation: Evidence from LRPs

2002 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 289-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Miller ◽  
David Navon
Keyword(s):  
Global Precedence ◽  
Local Shape ◽  
Global Shape ◽  
Preliminary Information ◽  
Readiness Potentials ◽  
Global Advantage ◽  
Response Activation ◽  
Lateralized Readiness Potentials

Lateralized readiness potentials (LRPs) were measured in left/right/no-go tasks using compound global/local stimuli. In Experiment 1, participants responded to local target shapes and ignored global ones. RTs were affected by the congruence of the global shape with the local one, and LRPs indicated that irrelevant global shapes activated the responses with which they were associated. In Experiment 2, participants responded to conjunctions of target shapes at both levels, withholding the response if a target appeared at only one level. Global shapes activated responses in no-go trials, but local shapes did not. The results are consistent with partial-output models in which preliminary information about global shape can partially activate responses that are inconsistent with the local shape. They also demonstrate that part of the global advantage arises early, before response activation begins and probably before recognition of the local shape.

Barking up the wrong free: readiness potentials reflect processes independent of conscious will

2013 ◽  
Vol 229 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Schlegel ◽  
Prescott Alexander ◽  
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong ◽  
Adina Roskies ◽  
Peter U. Tse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Readiness Potentials ◽  
Conscious Will

scholarly journals Differences in Intersubject Early Readiness Potentials Between Voluntary and Instructed Actions

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lipeng Zhang ◽  
Rui Zhang ◽  
Dezhong Yao ◽  
Li Shi ◽  
Jinfeng Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Readiness Potentials

scholarly journals The Effects of Accessory Stimuli on Information Processing: Evidence from Electrophysiology and a Diffusion Model Analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 847-864 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marieke Jepma ◽  
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers ◽  
Guido P. H. Band ◽  
Sander Nieuwenhuis
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Diffusion Model ◽  
Model Analysis ◽  
Energy Integration ◽  
Motor Execution ◽  
Stimulus Effect ◽  
Analysis Experiment ◽  
Readiness Potentials ◽  
Accessory Stimulus ◽  
Task Irrelevant

People typically respond faster to a stimulus when it is accompanied by a task-irrelevant accessory stimulus presented in another perceptual modality. However, the mechanisms responsible for this accessory-stimulus effect are still poorly understood. We examined the effects of auditory accessory stimulation on the processing of visual stimuli using scalp electrophysiology (Experiment 1) and a diffusion model analysis (Experiment 2). In accordance with previous studies, lateralized readiness potentials indicated that accessory stimuli do not speed motor execution. Surface Laplacians over the motor cortex, however, revealed a bihemispheric increase in motor activation—an effect predicted by nonspecific arousal models. The diffusion model analysis suggested that accessory stimuli do not affect parameters of the decision process, but expedite only the nondecision component of information processing. Consequently, we conclude that accessory stimuli facilitate stimulus encoding. The visual P1 and N1 amplitudes on accessory-stimulus trials were modulated in a way that is consistent with multisensory energy integration, a possible mechanism for this facilitation.

Assessment of Reactive Motor Performance with Event-Related Brain Potentials: Attention Processes in Elite Table Tennis Players

2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsung-Min Hung ◽  
Thomas W. Spalding ◽  
D. Laine Santa Maria ◽  
Bradley D. Hatfield
Keyword(s):  
Visual Attention ◽  
Hand Movement ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Lower Probability ◽  
Table Tennis ◽  
Attention Task ◽  
Brain Potentials ◽  
Tennis Players ◽  
Readiness Potentials ◽  
Related Potentials

Motor readiness, visual attention, and reaction time (RT) were assessed in 15 elite table tennis players (TTP) and 15 controls (C) during Posner’s cued attention task. Lateralized readiness potentials (LRP) were derived from contingent negative variation (CNV) at Sites C3 and C4, elicited between presentation of directional cueing (S1) and the appearance of the imperative stimulus (S2), to assess preparation for hand movement while P1 and N1 component amplitudes were derived from occipital event-related potentials (ERPs) in response to S2 to assess visual attention. Both groups had faster RT to validly cued stimuli and slower RT to invalidly cued stimuli relative to the RT to neutral stimuli that were not preceded by directional cueing, but the groups did not differ in attention benefit or cost. However, TTP did have faster RT to all imperative stimuli; they maintained superior reactivity to S2 whether preceded by valid, invalid, or neutral warning cues. Although both groups generated LRP in response to the directional cues, TTP generated larger LRP to prepare the corresponding hand for movement to the side of the cued location. TTP also had an inverse cueing effect for N1 amplitude (i.e., amplitude of N1 to the invalid cue > amplitude of N1 to the valid cue) while C visually attended to the expected and unexpected locations equally. It appears that TTP preserve superior reactivity to stimuli of uncertain location by employing a compensatory strategy to prepare their motor response to an event associated with high probability, while simultaneously devoting more visual attention to an upcoming event of lower probability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document