Cited by 93Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and AdaptationNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

Inhibitory motor control in response stopping and response switching

Open access
Kenner, N. M., Mumford, J. A., Hommer, R. E., Skup, M., Leibenluft, E., Poldrack, R. A.·2010·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

While much is known about the neural regions recruited in the human brain when a dominant motor response becomes inappropriate and must be stopped, less is known about the regions that support switching to a new, appropriate, response. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging with two variants of the stop-signal paradigm that require either stopping altogether or switching to a different response, we examined the brain systems involved in these two forms of executive control. Both stopping trials and switching trials showed common recruitment of the right inferior frontal gyrus, presupplementary motor area, and midbrain. Contrasting switching trials with stopping trials showed activation similar to that observed on response trials (where the initial response remains appropriate and no control is invoked), whereas there were no regions that showed significantly greater activity for stopping trials compared with switching trials. These results show that response switching can be supported by the same neural systems as response inhibition, and suggest that the same mechanism of rapid, nonselective response inhibition that is thought to support speeded response stopping can also support speeded response switching when paired with execution of the new, appropriate, response.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.1096-10.2010

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Both forms of competing response overlap functionally in depending on inhibitory brain mechanisms.

    “Whilst both of these forms of competing response overlap functionally, in terms of depending on inhibitory brain mechanisms [45], the former relies on pure suppression (i.e. no response taking place), while the latter includes engagement in different motor actions , thereby activating different brain areas and cognitive structures [46 -51]”

    From Habit as a therapeutic component in psychological treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder: A randomised controlled feasibility study. (2026) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Discussion reports shared activation in brain regions associated with response inhibition during stopping and switching, supporting the claimed overlap. But it says a common inhibitory process is one interpretation of the results and does not rule out alternative mechanisms for switching; it does not establish that both forms necessarily depend on inhibitory mechanisms. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kenner, N. M., Mumford, J. A., Hommer, R. E., Skup, M., Leibenluft, E., & Poldrack, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2010-06-23
Volume
30
Issue
25
Pages
8512-8518
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2077095279
Cited by
92
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
FWCI
7.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (Z01MH002778)
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 › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
response inhibition, response switching, executive function, stop-signal task, pre-supplementary motor area, right inferior frontal gyrus, midbrain, motor control
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mesencephalon, Motor Cortex, Neural Inhibition, Neural Pathways, Neurons, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, 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