Theta oscillatory dynamics of inhibitory control, error processing, and post-error adjustments: Neural underpinnings and alcohol-induced dysregulation in social drinkers.
Theta oscillatory dynamics of inhibitory control, error processing, and post-error adjustments: Neural underpinnings and alcohol-induced dysregulation in social drinkers.
复制标题
抑制控制，错误处理和错误后调整的Theta振荡动力学：社交饮酒者的神经基础和酒精诱导的失调。
DOI：
10.1111/acer.14856
复制
发表时间：
2022-07
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Rosen, Burke Q.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marinkovic, Ksenija;Rosen, Burke Q.
酒精中毒损害抑制控制，导致抑制，冲动行为。前扣带皮层（ACC）在一系列执行功能中起着至关重要的作用，并且对酒精的影响敏感，这有助于自上而下的认知失调。本研究使用多模态方法来检查酒精对抑制控制，抑制失败和神经行为优化的神经基础的急性影响，如错误后调整的试验间动态所反映的。成年社交饮酒者作为他们自己的对照，在急性酒精和安慰剂条件下参与Go/NoGo任务，采用多阶段平衡设计。脑磁图信号的分布式源建模与结构磁共振成像相结合，以表征时频域中抑制控制的时空动力学。成功的反应抑制（NoGo）引起右侧事件相关θ功率（4至7 Hz）。错误引起了背侧（dACC）θ功率的短潜伏期增加，随后是吻侧（rACC）的活动，这可能是情感“哦，不！”对错误的回应。dACC中的错误相关θ与第一次错误后试验中运动区的后续活动相关，表明发生了错误后输出调整。重要的是，在错误后试验中dACC θ的逐渐增加密切跟踪安慰剂下准确性的改善，这可能反映了认知控制参与以优化响应准确性。相比之下，酒精增加了NoGo委托错误，在正确的NoGo抑制期间θ失调，并取消了认知控制的错误后θ增强。确认额叶theta对抑制控制和错误监测的敏感性，结果支持沿着ACC的背头侧轴的功能和时间分离以及酒精对额叶回路的有害影响，从而实现自上而下的调节。随着时间的推移，酒精诱导的抑制解除可能会导致强迫性饮酒并导致酒精滥用。酒精中毒与放纵、冲动的行为有关。在这项多模态研究中，脑磁图（MEG）与结构MRI相结合，以检查酒精对抑制控制、错误和错误后优化的θ带（4 - 7 Hz）动力学的急性影响。成年社交饮酒者在酒精挑战期间参加了Go/NoGo任务。由成功反应抑制（NoGo）引起的右侧θ功率被酒精减弱。认知控制的错误后参与反映在背侧ACC θ和准确性的增加，这被酒精所消除。
Alcohol intoxication impairs inhibitory control, resulting in disinhibited, impulsive behavior. The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) plays an essential role in a range of executive functions and is sensitive to the effects of alcohol, which contributes to the top‐down cognitive dysregulation. This study used a multimodal approach to examine the acute effects of alcohol on the neural underpinnings of inhibitory control, inhibition failures, and neurobehavioral optimization as reflected in trial‐to‐trial dynamics of post‐error adjustments. Adult social drinkers served as their own controls by participating in the Go/NoGo task during acute alcohol and placebo conditions in a multi‐session, counterbalanced design. Distributed source modeling of the magnetoencephalographic signal was combined with structural magnetic resonance imaging to characterize the spatio‐temporal dynamics of inhibitory control in the time‐frequency domain. Successful response inhibition (NoGo) elicited right‐lateralized event‐related theta power (4 to 7 Hz). Errors elicited a short‐latency increase in theta power in the dorsal (dACC), followed by activity in the rostral (rACC), which may underlie an affective “oh, no!” orienting response to errors. Error‐related theta in the dACC was associated with subsequent activity of the motor areas on the first post‐error trial, suggesting the occurrence of post‐error output adjustments. Importantly, a gradual increase of the dACC theta across post‐error trials closely tracked improvements in accuracy under placebo, which may reflect cognitive control engagement to optimize response accuracy. In contrast, alcohol increased NoGo commission errors, dysregulated theta during correct NoGo withholding, and abolished the post‐error theta enhancement of cognitive control. Confirming the sensitivity of frontal theta to inhibitory control and error monitoring, the results support functional and temporal dissociation along the dorso‐rostral axis of the ACC and the deleterious effects of alcohol on the frontal circuitry subserving top‐down regulation. Over time, alcohol‐induced disinhibition may give rise to compulsive drinking and contribute to alcohol misuse. Alcohol intoxication is associated with disinhibited, impulsive behavior. In this multimodal study, magnetoencephalography (MEG) was combined with structural MRI to examine the acute effects of alcohol on theta‐band (4‐7Hz) dynamics underlying inhibitory control, errors, and post‐error optimization. Adult social drinkers participated in the Go/NoGo task during alcohol challenge. Right‐lateralized theta power elicited by successful response inhibition (NoGo) was attenuated by alcohol. Post‐error engagement of cognitive control was reflected in increased dorsal ACC theta and accuracy, which was abolished by alcohol.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
Bonini, Francesca;Burle, Boris;Vidal, Franck
通讯作者：
Vidal, Franck
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Hughes G;Yeung N
通讯作者：
Yeung N
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Danielmeier C;Ullsperger M
通讯作者：
Ullsperger M
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Cofresí RU;Bartholow BD
通讯作者：
Bartholow BD
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Bailey, Kira;Bartholow, Bruce D.;Lust, Sarah A.
通讯作者：
Lust, Sarah A.