Biology subjects

Hinder, M. R.

Publications and source records attributed to Hinder, M. R..

7 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2024

Stopping Speed to Auditory and Visual Stop Signals Depends on Go Signal Modality

Past research has found that the speed of the action cancellation process is influenced by the sensory modality/modalities of the environmental change that triggers it. However, the effect on selective stopping processes (where participants must cancel only one component of a multi-component movement) remains unknown, despite these complex movements often being required as we navigate our busy modern world. Thirty healthy adults (mean age = 31.1 years, SD = 10.5) completed five response-selective stop signal tasks featuring different combinations of "go signal" modality (the environmental change baring an imperative to initiate movement; auditory or visual) and "stop signal" modality (the environmental change indicating that action cancellation is required; auditory, visual, or audiovisual). Electromyographical (EMG) recordings of effector muscles allowed detailed comparison of the characteristics of voluntary action and cancellation between tasks. Behavioural and physiological measures of stopping speed demonstrated that the modality of the go signal influenced how quickly participants cancelled movement in response to the stop signal: stopping was faster in two cross-modal experimental conditions (auditory go - visual stop; visual go - auditory stop), than in two conditions using the same modality for both signals. A separate condition testing for multisensory facilitation revealed that stopping was fastest when the stop signal consisted of a combined audiovisual stimulus, compared to all other go-stop stimulus combinations. These findings provide novel evidence regarding the role of attentional networks in action cancellation and suggest modality specific cognitive resources influence the latency of the stopping process.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

Selective Cancellation of Reactive and Anticipated Movement: Differences in Speed of Action Reprogramming, but not Stopping.

The ability to inhibit movements is an essential component of a healthy executive control system. Two distinct but commonly used tasks to assess motor inhibition are the stop signal task (SST) and the anticipated response inhibition (ARI) task. The SST and ARI tasks are similar in that they both require cancelation of a prepotent movement; however, the SST involves cancelation of a speeded reaction to a temporally unpredictable signal, while the ARI task involves cancelation of an anticipated response that the participant has prepared to enact at a wholly predictable time. 33 participants (mean age = 33.3 years, range = 18-55 years) completed variants of the SST and ARI task. In each task, the majority of trials required bimanual button presses, while on a subset of trials a stop signal indicated that one of the presses should be cancelled (i.e., motor selective inhibition). Additional variants of the tasks also included trials featuring signals which were to be ignored, allowing for insights into the attentional component of the inhibitory response. Electromyographic (EMG) recordings allowed detailed comparison of the characteristics of voluntary action and cancellation. The speed of the inhibitory process was not influenced by whether the enacted movement was reactive (SST) or anticipated (ARI task). However, the ongoing (non-cancelled) component of anticipated movements was more efficient than reactive movements, as a result of faster action reprogramming (i.e., faster ongoing actions following successful selective inhibition). Older age was associated with both slower inhibition and slower action reprogramming across all reactive and anticipated tasks.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

Bilateral Intracortical Inhibition during Unilateral Motor Preparation and Sequence Learning

Motor sequence learning gradually quickens reaction time, suggesting that sequence learning alters motor preparation processes. Interestingly, evidence has shown that preparing sequence movements decreases short intracortical inhibition (SICI) in the contralateral motor cortex (M1), but also that sequence learning alters motor preparation processes in both the contralateral and ipsilateral M1s. Therefore, one possibility is that sequence learning alters the SICI decreases occurring during motor preparation in bilateral M1s. To examine this, two novel hypotheses were tested: unilateral sequence preparation would decrease SICI in bilateral M1s, and sequence learning would alter such bilateral SICI responses. Paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered over the contralateral and ipsilateral M1s to assess SICI in an index finger muscle during the preparation of sequences initiated by either the right index or little finger. In the absence of sequence learning, SICI decreased in both the contralateral and ipsilateral M1s during the preparation of sequences initiated by the right index finger, suggesting that SICI decreases in bilateral M1s during unilateral motor preparation. As sequence learning progressed, SICI decreased in the contralateral M1 whilst it increased in the ipsilateral M1. Moreover, these bilateral SICI responses were observed at the onset of motor preparation, suggesting that sequence learning altered baseline SICI levels rather than the SICI decreases occurring during motor preparation per se. Altogether, these results suggest that SICI responses in bilateral M1s reflect two motor processes: an acute decrease of inhibition during motor preparation, and a cooperative but bidirectional shift of baseline inhibition levels as sequence learning progresses.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

Faster action reprogramming, but not stopping, with proactive cues: Combining EMG and computational modelling in response-selective stop signal tasks

The ability to stop simple ongoing actions has been extensively studied using the stop signal task, but less is known about inhibition in more complex scenarios. Here we used a task requiring bimanual responses to go stimuli, but selective inhibition of only one of those responses following a stop signal. We assessed how proactive cues affect the nature of both the responding and stopping processes, and the well-documented "stopping delay" in the continuing action following successful stopping. In this task, estimates of the speed of inhibition based on a simple-stopping model are inappropriate, and have produced inconsistent findings about the effects of proactive control on motor inhibition. We instead used a multi-modal approach, based on improved methods of detecting and interpreting partial electromyographical (EMG) responses and the recently proposed SIS (simultaneously inhibit and start) model of selective stopping behaviour. Our results provide clear and converging evidence that proactive cues reduce the stopping delay effect by slowing bimanual responses and speeding unimanual responses, with a negligible effect on the speed of the stopping process.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

Comparison of online and offline applications of dual-site transcranial alternatingcurrent stimulation (tACS) on functional connectivity between pre-supplementarymotor area (preSMA) and right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) for improving responseinhibition

BackgroundThe efficacy of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is thought to be brain state-dependent, such that tACS during task performance would be hypothesised to offer greater potential for inducing beneficial electrophysiological changes in the brain and associated behavioural improvement compared to tACS at rest. However, to date, no empirical study has directly tested this postulation. ObjectiveHere we compared the effects of tACS applied during a stop signal task (online) to the effects of the same tACS protocol applied prior to the task (offline) and a sham control stimulation. MethodsA total of 53 young, healthy adults (32 female; 18-35 yrs) received dual-site beta tACS over the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) and pre-supplementary motor area (preSMA), which are thought to play critical roles in action cancellation, with phase-synchronised stimulation for 15 min with the aim of increasing functional connectivity. ResultsEEG connectivity analysis revealed significantly increased task-related functional connectivity following online but not offline tACS. Correlation analyses suggested that an increase in functional connectivity in the beta band at rest following online tACS was associated with an improvement in response inhibition. Interestingly, despite the lack of changes in functional connectivity at the target frequency range following offline tACS, significant improvements in response inhibition were still observed, suggesting offline tACS may still be efficacious in inducing behavioural changes, likely via a post-stimulation early plasticity mechanism. ConclusionOverall, the results indicate that online and offline dual-site beta tACS are beneficial in improving inhibitory control via distinct underlying mechanisms.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

The Neurochemical Mechanisms Underlying the Enhancing Effects of Rewards and Punishments on Motor Performance

Monetary rewards and punishments enhance motor performance and are associated with corticospinal excitability (CSE) increases within the motor cortex (M1) during movement preparation. However, such CSE changes have unclear origins; they could stem from increased glutamatergic (GLUTergic) facilitation and/or decreased type A gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABAA)-mediated inhibition within M1. To investigate this, paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to assess GLUTergic facilitation and GABAA inhibition within M1 whilst participants prepared to execute 4-element finger-press sequences. Behaviourally, rewards and punishments enhanced both reaction and movement times. Neurochemically, regardless of rewards or punishments, a digit-specific increase in GLUTergic facilitation and digit-unspecific decrease in GABAA inhibition occurred during preparation as movement onset approached. In parallel, both rewards and punishments non-specifically increased GLUTergic facilitation, but only rewards non-specifically decreased GABAA inhibition during preparation. This suggests that, to enhance performance, rewards both increase GLUTergic facilitation and decrease GABAA inhibition whilst punishments selectively increase GLUTergic facilitation. A control experiment revealed that such changes were not observed post-movement as participants processed reward and punishment feedback, indicating they were selective to movement preparation. Collectively, these results map the neurochemical changes in M1 by which incentives enhance motor performance.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2022

Beta tACS over rIFG and preSMA Improves Stopping Ability for Younger but not Older Adults

A growing body of research suggests that changes in both structural and functional connectivity in the aging brain contribute to declines in cognitive functions such as response inhibition. In recent years, transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has garnered substantial research interest as a potential tool for the modulation of functional connectivity. Here, we report the findings from a double-blind crossover study that investigated the effects of dual-site beta tACS over the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) and pre-supplementary motor area (preSMA) on functional connectivity measured with electroencephalography and response inhibition (stop-signal task performance) of healthy young (n = 18, aged 18-34 years) and older (n =15, aged 61-79 years) adults. Two tACS conditions were administered in separate sessions: in-phase tACS, where electrical currents delivered to the rIFG and preSMA had a 0{degrees} phase difference, and anti-phase tACS, where currents had a 180{degrees} phase difference. Stop-signal task performance was assessed before and after tACS. We found significant improvements in response inhibition that were not due to the phase of the tACS applied. There were also no significant changes in rIFG-preSMA phase connectivity in either age group from in- or anti-phase tACS. Furthermore, we did not observe significant differences in rIFG-preSMA phase connectivity between successful and unsuccessful inhibition, which suggests that rIFG-preSMA phase-coupling might not underlie effective response inhibition. The results offer insight into the neurophysiology of response inhibition and contribute to the future development of non-pharmacological interventions aimed at alleviating age-related declines in cognitive function.

neuroscience↗