scholarly journals Proactive Inhibition Activation Depends on Motor Preparation: A Single Pulse TMS Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefania C. Ficarella ◽  
Lorella Battelli
Keyword(s):  
Single Pulse ◽  
Motor Preparation ◽  
Proactive Inhibition

scholarly journals Preparing to React: A Behavioral Study on the Interplay between Proactive and Reactive Action Inhibition

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 680
Author(s):  
Stefania C. Ficarella ◽  
Andrea Desantis ◽  
Alexandre Zénon ◽  
Boris Burle
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Motor Preparation ◽  
Proactive Inhibition ◽  
False Alarms ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Inhibitory Mechanisms ◽  
Motor Activities ◽  
Errors Analysis ◽  
Action Inhibition

Motor preparation, based on one’s goals and expectations, allows for prompt reactions to stimulations from the environment. Proactive and reactive inhibitory mechanisms modulate this preparation and interact to allow a flexible control of responses. In this study, we investigate these two control mechanisms with an ad hoc cued Go/NoGo Simon paradigm in a within-subjects design, and by measuring subliminal motor activities through electromyographic recordings. Go cues instructed participants to prepare a response and wait for target onset to execute it (Go target) or inhibit it (NoGo target). Proactive inhibition keeps the prepared response in check, hence preventing false alarms. Preparing the cue-coherent effector in advance speeded up responses, even when it turned out to be the incorrect effector and reactive inhibition was needed to perform the action with the contralateral one. These results suggest that informative cues allow for the investigation of the interaction between proactive and reactive action inhibition. Partial errors’ analysis suggests that their appearance in compatible conflict-free trials depends on cue type and prior preparatory motor activity. Motor preparation plays a key role in determining whether proactive inhibition is needed to flexibly control behavior, and it should be considered when investigating proactive/reactive inhibition.

scholarly journals Rise-to-threshold and dynamical systems views of proactive inhibition

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Rawji ◽  
Sachin Modi ◽  
Lorenzo Rocchi ◽  
Marjan Jahanshahi ◽  
John C. Rothwell
Keyword(s):  
Dynamical Systems ◽  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Pulse Width ◽  
Threshold Model ◽  
Motor Preparation ◽  
Proactive Inhibition ◽  
Movement Execution ◽  
Systems Perspective ◽  
Systems Models ◽  
Dynamical Systems Models

AbstractSuccessful models of movement should encompass the flexibility of the human motor system to execute movements under different contexts. One such context-dependent modulation is proactive inhibition, a type of behavioural inhibition concerned with responding with restraint. Whilst movement has classically been modelled as a rise-to-threshold process, there exists a lack of empirical evidence for this in limb movements. Alternatively, the dynamical systems view conceptualises activity during motor preparation as setting the initial state of a dynamical system, that evolves into the movement upon receipt of a trigger. We tested these models by measuring how proactive inhibition influenced movement preparation and execution in humans. We changed the orientation (PA: postero-anterior and AP: antero-posterior flowing currents) and pulse width (120 μs and 30 μs) of motor cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation to probe different corticospinal interneuron circuits. PA and AP interneuron circuits represent the dimensions of a state space upon which motor cortex activity unfolds during motor preparation and execution. AP30 inputs were inhibited at the go cue, regardless of proactive inhibition, whereas PA120 inputs scaled inversely with the probability of successful inhibition. When viewed through a rise-to-threshold model, proactive inhibition was implemented by delaying the trigger to move, suggesting that motor preparation and execution are independent. A dynamical systems perspective showed that proactive inhibition was marked by a shift in the distribution of interneuron networks (trajectories) during movement execution, despite normalisation for reaction time. Viewing data through the rise-to-threshold and dynamical systems models reveal complimentary mechanisms by which proactive inhibition is implemented.Key pointsWe view proactive inhibition through the rise-to-threshold and dynamical systems models.We change the orientation (PA: postero-anterior and AP: antero-posterior flowing currents) and pulse width (120 μs and 30 μs) of transcranial magnetic stimulation to probe interneuron networks in motor cortex during behavioural tasks employing proactive inhibition.When viewed through a rise-to-threshold model, proactive inhibition was implemented by delaying the trigger to move, suggesting that motor preparation and execution are independent.A dynamical systems perspective showed that despite normalisation for reaction time, the trajectory/balance between PA120 and AP30 interneuron inputs during movement execution depended on proactive inhibition.Viewing data through the rise-to-threshold and dynamical systems models reveal complimentary mechanisms by which proactive inhibition is implemented.

Paired-Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation During Preparation for Simple and Choice Reaction Time Tasks

2010 ◽  
Vol 104 (3) ◽  
pp. 1392-1400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oscar Soto ◽  
Josep Valls-Solé ◽  
Hatice Kumru
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Choice Reaction Time ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Short Interval ◽  
Single Pulse ◽  
Motor Preparation ◽  
Paired Pulse ◽  
Time Points

Motor preparation for execution of both simple and choice reaction time tasks (SRT and CRT) involves enhancement of corticospinal excitability (CE). However, motor preparation also implies changes in inhibitory control that have thus far been much less studied. Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) has been shown to decrease before CE increases. Therefore we reasoned that, if SICI contributes to inhibitory control of voluntary movement during the preparatory phase, it would be larger in CRT than in SRT because of the need to keep the movement unreleased until the uncertainty resolves on which task is required. We measured changes in SICI and in CE at different time points preceding motor reaction in normal subjects. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (spTMS) and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (ppTMS) produced time-dependent changes in both SRT and CRT, with shortening when applied close to the presentation of the imperative signal (“early”) and lengthening when applied near the expected reaction (“late”). In addition, at all stimulation time points, reaction time was shorter with ppTMS than that with spTMS, but there was no consistent association between the amount of SICI and reaction time changes. At early stimulation time points, CE was reduced in CRT but not in SRT. However, SICI in CRT was not different from SICI in SRT. At late stimulation time points, SICI decreased just before enhancement of CE. Our findings indicate that inhibitory circuits other than SICI are responsible for setting the level of CE at earlier parts of the reaction time period. Although the decrease in SICI may contribute to the increase in CE at the last part of the premotor period, the two phenomena are not dependent on each other.

Sport practice changes the brain: A study on motor preparation in top-level shooters

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donatella Spinelli ◽  
Teresa Aprile Francesco Di Russo ◽  
Sabrina Pitzalis
Keyword(s):  
Motor Preparation ◽  
Sport Practice ◽  
The Brain

Proactive inhibition in free recall.

1970 ◽  
Vol 83 (3, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 495-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Shuell ◽  
Roger Koehler
Keyword(s):  
Free Recall ◽  
Proactive Inhibition
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document