■行为抑制控制(BIC)描述了抑制不适当的显性反应以满足上下文要求的认知功能。尽管在执行/不执行和停止信号任务期间对BIC的神经底物进行了大量研究,这些任务一直被证明很难分离反应抑制的神经过程,这是首要的利益,来自反应一代。因此,有必要使用两选怪球(TCO)任务探索BIC的神经底物,其双重反应的设计被认为产生了没有反应产生混淆的抑制作用。
■当前的研究旨在描述在两选怪球任务中进行行为抑制控制的神经底物,它设计了双响应来平衡响应生成。此外,在此任务期间执行BIC的神经底物与执行/不执行任务中的神经底物进行比较,在单一条件下设计电机响应。
■本研究将去/去(GNG)和TCO任务整合到新的三选择BIC范式中,由标准(75%)组成,偏差(12.5%),和不去(12.5%)的条件同时。四十八名大学生参加了这个实验,这要求他们通过按下不同的键来响应标准(频繁)和异常刺激,同时抑制对无刺激的运动反应。采用接合分析和ROI(感兴趣区域)分析来确定BIC过程的独特神经机制。
■这两个任务在评估BIC功能方面都是有效的,与GNG中的标准条件相比,no-go的精度明显较低,与TCO中的标准条件相比,偏差的准确性和反应时间明显较低。然而,偏差条件和不进行条件之间的准确性没有显着差异。此外,功能神经影像学已经证明,前扣带回皮质(ACC)的激活被观察到与GNG任务中的标准对比度,但不是在越轨TCO任务中的标准对比,这表明ACC的参与不是BIC的必要组成部分。第二,在TCO和GNG中共同激活的区域的ROI分析显示,右下额叶皮层(三角形和眼眶)共同激活,TCO任务中的信号明显高于GNG任务中的信号。
■这些发现表明,在TCO任务中对标准和异常刺激的设计响应,与GNG任务相比,在BIC期间产生了更突出的前额叶抑制过程,并消除了ACC激活的不必要成分。这意味着前额叶介入,但不是ACC,对于成功抑制优势行为是强制性的。
UNASSIGNED: Behavioral inhibitory control (BIC) depicts a cognitive function of inhibiting inappropriate dominant responses to meet the context requirement. Despite abundant research into neural substrates of BIC during the go/no-go and stop signal tasks, these tasks were consistently shown hard to isolate neural processes of response inhibition, which is of primary interest, from those of response generation. Therefore, it is necessary to explore neural substrates of BIC using the two-choice oddball (TCO) task, whose design of dual responses is thought to produce an inhibition effect free of the confounds of response generation.
UNASSIGNED: The current study aims at depicting neural substrates of performing behavioral inhibitory control in the two-choice oddball task, which designs dual responses to balance response generation. Also, neural substrates of performing BIC during this task are compared with those in the go/no-go task, which designs a motor response in a single condition.
UNASSIGNED: The present study integrated go/no-go (GNG) and TCO tasks into a new Three-Choice BIC paradigm, which consists of standard (75%), deviant (12.5%), and no-go (12.5%) conditions simultaneously. Forty-eight college students participated in this experiment, which required them to respond to standard (frequent) and deviant stimuli by pressing different keys, while inhibiting motor response to no-go stimuli. Conjunction analysis and ROI (region of interest) analysis were adopted to identify the unique neural mechanisms that subserve the processes of BIC.
UNASSIGNED: Both tasks are effective in assessing BIC function, reflected by the significantly lower accuracy of no-go compared to standard condition in GNG, and the significantly lower accuracy and longer reaction time of deviant compared to standard condition in TCO. However, there were no significant differences between deviant and no-go conditions in accuracy. Moreover, functional neuroimaging has demonstrated that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) activation was observed for no-go vs. standard contrast in the GNG task, but not in deviant vs. standard contrast in the TCO task, suggesting that ACC involvement is not a necessary component of BIC. Second, ROI analysis of areas that were co-activated in TCO and GNG showed co-activations in the right inferior frontal cortex (triangle and orbital), with the signals in the TCO task significantly higher than those in the GNG task.
UNASSIGNED: These findings show that the designed responses to both standard and deviant stimuli in the TCO task, compared to the GNG task, produced a more prominent prefrontal inhibitory processing and extinguished an unnecessary component of ACC activation during BIC. This implies that prefrontal involvement, but not that of ACC, is mandatory for the successful performance of inhibiting prepotent behaviors.