Stopping a response has global or nonglobal effects on the motor system depending on preparation
Stopping a response has global or nonglobal effects on the motor system depending on preparation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/jn.00704.2011
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Aron, Adam R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Greenhouse, Ian;Oldenkamp, Caitlin L.;Aron, Adam R.
Greenhouse I，Oldenkamp CL，Aron AR.停止反应对运动系统具有全局或非全局性影响，这取决于准备情况。J Neurophysiol 107：384-392，2012.首次发表于2011年10月19日; doi：10.1152/jn.00704.2011.-许多研究都集中在人们如何停止启动反应的倾向时，指示的信号。这种停止似乎对运动系统有全局性的影响。例如，通过在初级运动皮层的腿部区域上递送经颅磁刺激（TMS），可以检测当手停止时腿部中的抑制（Badry R等人，Suppression of human corticostero-motoneuronal excitability during the stop-signal task. Clin Neurophysiol 120：1717-1723，2009）。在这里，我们问这种“全局抑制”是否可以主动观察到，即，当人们预期他们可能不得不停止。我们使用了一个有条件的停止信号任务，它允许测量“预期阶段”（即，其中应用主动控制）和“停止”阶段。在预期阶段（实验1）和停止阶段（实验1和2）期间提供TMS，以测量腿部兴奋性。在预期阶段，我们没有观察到腿部抑制，但我们在停止阶段观察到了，与Badry et al.（2009）一致。此外，当我们将受试者分组为那些行为上放慢的人（即，运动积极控制）和那些没有运动积极控制的人，我们发现，放慢速度的受试者在停下来时没有表现出腿部抑制，而那些没有放慢速度的受试者在停下来时确实表现出腿部抑制。这些结果表明，如果受试者准备停止，那么他们这样做不会对运动系统产生整体影响。因此，准备工作使它们能够更有选择性地停止。
Greenhouse I, Oldenkamp CL, Aron AR. Stopping a response has global or nonglobal effects on the motor system depending on preparation. J Neurophysiol 107: 384-392, 2012. First published October 19, 2011; doi:10.1152/jn.00704.2011.-Much research has focused on how people stop initiated response tendencies when instructed by a signal. Stopping of this kind appears to have global effects on the motor system. For example, by delivering transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the leg area of the primary motor cortex, it is possible to detect suppression in the leg when the hand is being stopped (Badry R et al. Suppression of human cortico-motoneuronal excitability during the stop-signal task. Clin Neurophysiol 120: 1717-1723, 2009). Here, we asked if such "global suppression" can be observed proactively, i.e., when people anticipate they might have to stop. We used a conditional stop signal task, which allows the measurement of both an "anticipation phase" (i.e., where proactive control is applied) and a "stopping" phase. TMS was delivered during the anticipation phase (experiment 1) and also during the stopping phase (experiments 1 and 2) to measure leg excitability. During the anticipation phase, we did not observe leg suppression, but we did during the stopping phase, consistent with Badry et al. (2009). Moreover, when we split the subject groups into those who slowed down behaviorally (i.e., exercised proactive control) and those who did not, we found that subjects who slowed did not show leg suppression when they stopped, whereas those who did not slow did show leg suppression when they stopped. These results suggest that if subjects prepare to stop, then they do so without global effects on the motor system. Thus, preparation allows them to stop more selectively.