Temporal preparation,response inhibition and impulsivity

Temporal preparation and impulsivity involve overlapping neural structures (prefrontal cortex) and cognitive functions (response inhibition and time perception), however, their interrelations had not been investigated. We studied such interrelations by comparing the performance of groups with low vs. high non-clinical trait impulsivity during a temporal preparation go no-go task. This task measured, in less than 10 min, how response inhibition was influenced both by temporal orienting of attention (guided by predictive temporal cues) and by sequential effects (produced by repetition/alternation of the duration of preparatory intervals in consecutive trials). The results showed that sequential effects produced dissociable patterns of temporal preparation as a function of impulsivity. Sequential effects facilitated both response speed (reaction times – RTs – to the go condition) and response inhibition (false alarms to the no-go condition) selectively in the low impulsivity group. In the high impulsivity group, in contrast, sequential effects only improved RTs but not response inhibition. We concluded that both excitatory and inhibitory processing may be enhanced concurrently by sequential effects, which enables the temporal preparation of fast and controlled responses. Impulsivity could hence be related to less efficient temporal preparation of that inhibitory processing.     

Trait impulsivity and callous-unemotional traits as predictors of inhibitory control and risky choices among high-risk adolescents

Trait impulsivity and callous-unemotional traits are associated with behavioural problems among high-risk adolescents. While both are known to influence behaviour, the nature of their expression in high-risk behaviours, particularly those related to inhibitory control, is not well understood. In the current, preliminary study, we examined whether and how these traits predicted deficits in behaviour driven by bottom-up, automatic versus deliberate, top-down inhibitory processes among high-risk adolescents. Two go/no-go task variants, emotional and non-emotional, were used to assess reactive response inhibition, and the Balloon Analogue Risk Task was used to assess the ability to resist deliberate risky choices. The results showed that the two types of self-reported trait measures were differentially associated with performance on the two types of behavioural inhibition tasks. Trait impulsivity predicted non-emotional inhibitory control whereas callous-unemotional traits predicted risky choices. The results also showed that the emotions task elicited slower reaction times and higher false alarm rates than did the letters task, and that participants had greater difficulty inhibiting responses to negatively than to positively valenced no-go stimuli. While preliminary, the results suggest that the interplay between trait impulsivity and callous-unemotional traits is an important determinant of inhibitory behaviour in this high-risk adolescents.     

Trait aggression is related to anger-modulated deficits in response inhibition

The goal of the present study was to investigate the role of emotion-modulated response inhibition in individual difference in the disposition towards aggressive behavior (i.e. trait aggression). One hundred and twelve undergraduate participants completed a behavioral measure of emotion modulated response inhibition (an emotional go/no-go task), self-report measures previously shown to predict aggression (Big-5 traits, impulsivity), and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ) as a measure of trait aggression. Results show that deficient inhibition to angry, but not happy, faces were related to trait aggression but not to other traits. These findings provide support for the role of specific top down executive control mechanisms in the regulation of aggressive tendencies and highlight the importance of examining these mechanisms in an emotional context.     

Response inhibition in adults and teenagers: spatiotemporal differences in the prefrontal cortex

Inhibition is a core executive function reliant on the frontal lobes that shows protracted maturation through to adulthood. We investigated the spatiotemporal characteristics of response inhibition during a visual go/no-go task in 14 teenagers and 14 adults using magnetoencephalography (MEG) and a contrast between two no-go experimental conditions designed to eliminate a common confound in earlier studies comparing go with no-go trials. Source analyses were performed using an event-related beamformer algorithm with co-registered individual structural MRIs. Performance was controlled to be similar across subjects. Analyses of MEG data revealed bilateral prefrontal activity in the inhibitory condition for both age groups, but with different spatiotemporal patterns: around 300ms after stimulus onset in middle frontal gyri in teenagers vs. around 260ms in inferior frontal gyri in adults. Moreover, the inhibition of a prepotent motor response showed a stronger recruitment of the left hemisphere in teenagers than in adults and of the right hemisphere in adults than in teenagers. These findings provide high-resolution temporal and spatial information regarding response inhibition in adolescents compared to adults, independent of motor components and performance differences.     

The proposed interaction between working memory and inhibition

Two experiments investigated the determinants of performance on a go/no-go task by studying the interplay of two executive function components, working memory (WM) and inhibition. Systematically varied task demands on WM and inhibition were used in the analysis of performance together with individual capacity measures of both functions, thereby investigating an interactive view of WM and inhibition. Further analyses were conducted with individual differences in general fluid intelligence (gF), in an attempt to study the role of higher order cognition in handling task demands. The results are new in presenting empirical evidence for interactive effects of the task demand variables in concert with individual WM capacity as well as with gF, suggesting that executive processes common to WM and gF are involved in inhibitory performance, whereas gF appears to reflect a broader function in controlling behaviour in relation to task goals, whether it involves active responding or not.     

Applying a dual process model of self-regulation: The association between executive working memory capacity,negative urgency,and negative mood induction on pre-potent response inhibition

This study tested a dual-process model of self-control where the combination of high impulsivity (negative urgency – NU), weak reflective/control processes (low executive working memory capacity – E-WMC), and a cognitive load is associated with increased failures to inhibit pre-potent responses on a cued go/no-go task. Using a within-subjects design, a cognitive load with and without negative emotional load was implemented to consider situational factors. Results suggested that: (1) high NU was associated with low E-WMC; (2) low E-WMC significantly predicted more inhibitory control failures across tasks; and (3) there was a significant interaction of E-WMC and NU, revealing those with low E-WMC and high NU had the highest rates of inhibitory control failures on all conditions of the task. In conclusion, results suggest that while E-WMC is a strong independent predictor of inhibitory control, NU provides additional information for vulnerability to problems associated with self-regulation.     

Conditions under which children experience inhibitory difficulty with a "button-press" go/no-go task

Go/no-go tasks seem to provide a simple marker of inhibitory development in young children. Children are told to respond to one stimulus on go trials but to make no response to another stimulus on no-go trials; responding on no-go trials is assumed to reflect a failure to inhibit the go response. However, there is evidence to suggest that a type of go/no-go task, which we call the "button-press" task, does not require inhibition. We investigated the conditions under which young children (M=3 years 6 months, N=120) experience inhibitory difficulty with this type of task. The data suggest that the speed of stimulus presentation is crucial and that other studies using this type of task have presented the stimuli too briefly. The importance of establishing the inhibitory credentials of a task before it is used as a marker of inhibitory control is emphasized.     

More conservative go/no-go response criterion under high working memory load

Previous work has shown that the efficiency of selective attention depends on the availability of cognitive control functions, including working memory. Here we examined the role of working memory in another task involving executive control, namely, a go/no-go task. Participants performed the Sustained Attention to Response Task, which requires withholding a prepotent response to an infrequent target, when at the same time placing a low or high load on an unrelated working memory task. Working memory load had the effect of reducing accuracy on the go trials, when at the same time increasing accuracy on the no-go trials. We interpret these findings to suggest that high working memory load led to a shift to a more conservative response criterion.     

Go no-go performance under psychosocial stress: beneficial effects of implementation intentions

Acute stress has been found to have negative and implementation intentions (IIs) to have positive effects on cognitive performance. This study was the first to examine the effects of IIs on executive action control under acute psychosocial stress. Forty-two male subjects aged 21-39 years were randomly assigned to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) versus a rest condition. In addition, the instruction to the executive task (a go no-go task) was manipulated (IIs versus standard instruction). After the stress test, a dual-task procedure including a go no-go task was conducted. The TSST resulted in increases in cortisol response, heart rate and state anxiety compared to the rest condition. Acute stress significantly impaired go no-go performance, but only in the group without IIs. We conclude that under acute stress conditions executive functioning is reduced, but the use of IIs can be an effective strategy to overcome this negative effect.     

P50 sensory gating is related to performance on select tasks of cognitive inhibition

P50 suppression deficits have been documented in clinical and nonclinical populations, but the behavioral correlates of impaired auditory sensory gating remain poorly understood. In the present study, we examined the relationship between P50 gating and healthy adults’ performance on cognitive inhibition tasks. On the basis of load theory (Lavie, Hirst, de Fockert, & Viding, 2004), we predicted that a high perceptual load, a possible consequence of poor auditory P50 sensory gating, would have differential (i.e., positive vs. negative) effects on performance of cognitive inhibition tasks. A dissociation was observed such that P50 gating was negatively related to interference resolution on a Stroop task and positively related to response inhibition on a go/no-go task. Our findings support the idea that a high perceptual load may be beneficial to Stroop performance because of the reduced processing of distractors but detrimental to performance on the go/no-go task because of interference with stimulus discrimination.     

The role of the prefrontal cortex in the go/no-go task in humans: a positron emission tomography study

To study the localization of response inhibition in the human brain, especially the role of the prefrontal cortex and laterality of its activation, we used positron emission tomography (PET) to measure regional cerebral blood flow in 11 right-handed participants while they performed a go/no-go and a simple control reaction-time task. In the control task, the participants responded to a target stimulus following a cue stimulus. In the go/no-go task they were instructed to inhibit the required response if the target stimulus did not appear. These tasks were performed using each hand. The right prefrontal cortex was found to be significantly activated when the go/no-go task was compared with the control task, regardless of the responding hand. The results indicated that response inhibition per se may be controlled by the right prefrontal cortex regardless of response hand for right-handed participants.     

The N2 in go/no-go tasks reflects conflict monitoring not response inhibition

The functional significance of the N2 in go/no-go tasks was investigated by comparing electrophysiological data obtained from two tasks: a go/no-go task involving both response inhibition as well as response conflict monitoring, and a go/GO task associated with conflict monitoring only. No response was required to no-go stimuli, and a response with maximal force to GO stimuli. The relative frequency of the go stimuli (80% vs. 50%) was varied. The N2 peaked on both no-go and GO trials, with larger amplitudes for both signals when presented in a context of frequent (80%) go signals. These results support the idea that the N2 reflects conflict monitoring not response inhibition.     

Attention and gaze shifting in dual-task and go/no-go performance with vocal responding

Evidence from go/no-go performance on the Eriksen flanker task with manual responding suggests that individuals gaze at stimuli just as long as needed to identify them (e.g., Sanders, 1998). In contrast, evidence from dual-task performance with vocal responding suggests that gaze shifts occur after response selection (e.g., Roelofs, 2008a). This difference in results may be due to the nature of the task situation (go/no-go vs. dual task) or the response modality (manual vs. vocal). We examined this by having participants vocally respond to congruent and incongruent flanker stimuli and shift gaze to left- or right-pointing arrows. The arrows required a manual response (dual task) or determined whether the vocal response to the flanker stimuli had to be given or not (go/no-go). Vocal response and gaze shift latencies were longer on incongruent than congruent trials in both dual-task and go/no-go performance. The flanker effect was also present in the manual response latencies in dual-task performance. Ex-Gaussian analyses revealed that the flanker effect on the gaze shifts consisted of a shift of the entire latency distribution. These results suggest that gaze shifts occur after response selection in both dual-task and go/no-go performance with vocal responding.     

The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting

Response selection in task shifting was explored using a go/no-go methodology. The no-go signal occurred unpredictably with stimulus onset so that all trials required task preparation but only go trials required response selection. Experiment 1 showed that shift costs were absent after no-go trials, indicating that response processes are crucial for shift costs. In Experiment 2, backward inhibition was absent after no-go trials. Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrated that response selection, rather than execution, causes backward inhibition. All 4 experiments showed effects of preparation time in go trials, suggesting that advance preparation must have also occurred in no-go trials. The authors concluded that inhibition of irrelevant task sets arises only at response selection and that residual shift costs reflect such persisting inhibition.     

Task difficulty modulates brain-behavior correlations in language production and cognitive control: Behavioral and fMRI evidence from a phonological go/no-go picture-naming paradigm

Language production and cognitive control are complex processes that involve distinct yet interacting brain networks. However, the extent to which these processes interact and their neural bases have not been thoroughly examined. Here, we investigated the neural and behavioral bases of language production and cognitive control via a phonological go/no-go picture-naming task. Naming difficulty and cognitive control demands (i.e., conflict monitoring and response inhibition) were manipulated by varying the proportion of naming trials (go trials) and inhibition trials (no-go trials) across task runs. The results demonstrated that as task demands increased, participants’ behavioral performance declined (i.e., longer reaction times on naming trials, more commission errors on inhibition trials) whereas brain activation generally increased. Increased activation was found not only within the language network but also in domain-general control regions. Additionally, right superior and inferior frontal and left supramarginal gyri were sensitive to increased task difficulty during both language production and response inhibition. We also found both positive and negative brain–behavior correlations. Most notably, increased activation in sensorimotor regions, such as precentral and postcentral gyri, was associated with better behavioral performance, in both successful picture naming and successful inhibition. Moreover, comparing the strength of correlations across conditions indicated that the brain–behavior correlations in sensorimotor regions that were associated with improved performance became stronger as task demands increased. Overall, our results suggest that cognitive control demands affect language production, and that successfully coping with increases in task difficulty relies on both language-specific and domain-general cognitive control regions.     

Predicting cognitive control from preschool to late adolescence and young adulthood

In this longitudinal study, the proportion of time preschoolers directed their attention away from rewarding stimuli during a delay-of-gratification task was positively associated with efficiency (greater speed without reduced accuracy) at responding to targets in a go/no-go task more than 10 years later. The overall findings suggest that preschoolers' ability to effectively direct their attention away from tempting aspects of the rewards in a delay-of-gratification task may be a developmental precursor for the ability to perform inhibitory tasks such as the go/no-go task years later. Because performance on the go/no-go task has previously been characterized as involving activation of fronto-striatal regions, the present findings also suggest that performance in the delay-of-gratification task may serve as an early marker of individual differences in the functional integrity of this circuitry.     

Temporal preparation and inhibitory deficit in fibromyalgia syndrome

Cognitive deficits in fibromyalgia may be specifically related to controlled processes, such as those measured by working memory or executive function tasks. This hypothesis was tested here by measuring controlled temporal preparation (temporal orienting) during a response inhibition (go no-go) task. Temporal orienting effects (faster reaction times for targets appearing at temporally attended vs. unattended moments) and response inhibition were impaired in fibromyalgia compared to the control group. It is concluded that frontal networks underlying attentional control (temporal orienting and response inhibition) can be a dysfunctional neurocognitive mechanism in fibromyalgia.     

Effects of response selection on the task repetition benefit in task switching

A task switch typically leads to worse performance than a repetition does. This shift cost can be reduced with sufficient task preparation time, but a residual cost usually remains. We propose that a large part of this residual cost is caused by an activation bias produced by response selection processes in the preceding trial. In our experiments, we manipulated response selection requirements using a go/no-go methodology. The residual shift cost disappeared after no-go trials, suggesting that response selection is crucial to establish an activation bias for the current category-response rules and that this bias persists into the next trial. A comparison with a go-only group confirmed this analysis by revealing no differences in preparatory strategy due to the inclusion of no-go trials. In addition, no-go trials had no significant effects on subsequent trials in a single-task experiment, suggesting that no-go trials are not coded as a task different from go trials and that there is no inhibition of the prepared task in a no-go trial. We thus conclude that a persisting activation bias of response rules plays a major role in task switching.     

Transfer of response codes from choice-response to go/no-go tasks

The present study investigated the conditions for observing the Simon effect in go/no-go tasks. The Simon effect denotes faster and more accurate responses when irrelevant stimulus location and response location correspond than when they do not correspond. In four experiments, participants performed both in a choice-response task (CRT) and in a go/no-go task, and we varied the order and the similarity of the tasks. In the CRT, participants pressed a left key to one stimulus colour and a right key to another stimulus colour; in the go/no-go task, participants pressed one (e.g., left) key to one stimulus colour and refrained from responding to the other stimulus colour. As expected, Simon effects were consistently observed in the CRT. In contrast, Simon effects in the go/no-go task were only observed when it followed the CRT and when the mapping of stimulus colours to response locations was preserved between tasks (i.e., in Experiment 4). Results suggest that transfer of a particular S–R rule including response location from the CRT to the go/no-go task was responsible for the Simon effect in the latter task. In general, results are consistent with a response-discrimination account of the Simon effect.     

Joint response–effect compatibility

When performing jointly on a task, human agents are assumed to represent their coactor’s share of this task, and research in various joint action paradigms has focused on representing the coactor’s stimulus–response assignments. Here we show that the response–effect (R–E) contingencies exploited by a coactor also affect performance, and thus might be represented as if they were used by oneself. Participants performed an R–E compatibility task, with keypresses producing spatially compatible or incompatible action effects. We did not observe any R–E compatibility effects when the task was performed in isolation (individual go–no-go). By contrast, small but reliable R–E compatibility effects emerged when the same task was performed in a joint setting. These results indicate that the knowledge of a coactor’s R–E contingencies can influence whether self-produced action effects are used for one’s own motor control.