CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 85Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and AdaptationFree Will and Agency

Top-down suppression of incompatible motor activations during response selection under conflict

Open access
Klein, Pierre-Alexandre, Petitjean, Charlotte, Olivier, Etienne, Duque, Julie·2014·NeuroImage
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Top-down control is critical to select goal-directed actions in changeable environments, particularly when several options compete for selection. This control system is thought to involve a mechanism that suppresses activation of unwanted response representations. We tested this hypothesis, in humans, by measuring motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in a left finger muscle during motor preparation in an adapted Eriksen flanker task. Subjects reported, by a left or right button-press, the orientation of a left- or right-facing central arrow, flanked by two distractor arrows on each side. Central and peripheral arrows either pointed in the same (congruent trial) or in the opposite direction (incongruent trial). Top-down control was manipulated by changing the probability of congruent and incongruent trials in a given block. In the "mostly incongruent" (MI) blocks, 80% of trials were incongruent, producing a context in which subjects strongly anticipated that they would have to face conflict. In the "mostly congruent" (MC) blocks, 80% of trials were congruent and thus subjects barely anticipated conflict in that context. Thus, we assume that top-down control was stronger in the MI than in the MC condition. Accordingly, subjects displayed a lower error rate and shorter reaction times for the incongruent trials in the MI context than for similar trials in the MC context. More interestingly, we found that top-down control specifically reduced activation of the incompatible motor representation during response selection under high conflict. That is, when the central arrow specified a right hand response, left (non-selected) MEPs became smaller in the MI than in the MC condition, but only for incongruent trials, and this measure was positively correlated with performance. In contrast, MEPs elicited in the non-selected hand during congruent trials, or during all trials in which the left hand was selected, tended to increase more after the imperative signal in the MI than the MC condition. Another important observation was that, overall, MEPs were already strongly suppressed at the onset of the imperative signal and that this effect was particularly pronounced in the MI context. Hence, suppression of motor excitability seems to be a key component of conflict resolution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.005

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Klein, P.-A., Petitjean, C., Olivier, E., & Duque, J.
Affiliations
UCLouvain (BE)
ORCID
Olivier, Etienne
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-02
Volume
86
Pages
138-149
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.005
OpenAlex
W2016839376
Cited by
85
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • ARC («Actions de Recherche Concertées» — Communauté Française de Belgique)
  • “Fonds Spéciaux de Recherche” (FSR) of the Université catholique de Louvain
  • “Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique Médicale” (FRSM)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
top-down control, response selection, response conflict, motor evoked potentials, flanker task, conflict anticipation, motor preparation, cognitive control
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Conflict, Psychological, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Motor Cortex, Movement, Psychomotor Performance, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Young Adult, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review