Cited by 308Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurological disorders and treatmentsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Effective Connectivity Reveals Important Roles for Both the Hyperdirect (Fronto-Subthalamic) and the Indirect (Fronto-Striatal-Pallidal) Fronto-Basal Ganglia Pathways during Response Inhibition

Open access
Jahfari, Sara, Waldorp, Lourens, van den Wildenberg, Wery P. M., Scholte, H. Steven, Ridderinkhof, K. Richard, Forstmann, Birte U.·2011·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Fronto-basal ganglia pathways play a crucial role in voluntary action control, including the ability to inhibit motor responses. Response inhibition might be mediated via a fast hyperdirect pathway connecting the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) and the presupplementary motor area (preSMA) with the subthalamic nucleus or, alternatively, via the indirect pathway between the cortex and caudate. To test the relative contribution of these two pathways to inhibitory action control, we applied an innovative quantification method for effective brain connectivity. Functional magnetic resonance imaging data were collected from 20 human participants performing a Simon interference task with an occasional stop signal. A single right-lateralized model involving both the hyperdirect and indirect pathways best explained the pattern of brain activation on stop trials. Notably, the overall connection strength of this combined model was highest on successfully inhibited trials. Inspection of the relationship between behavior and connection values revealed that fast inhibitors showed increased connectivity between rIFG and right caudate (rCaudate), whereas slow inhibitors were associated with increased connectivity between preSMA and rCaudate. In compliance, connection strengths from the rIFG and preSMA into the rCaudate were correlated negatively. If participants failed to stop, the magnitude of experienced interference (Simon effect), but not stopping latency, was predictive for the hyperdirect–indirect model connections. Together, the present results suggest that both the hyperdirect and indirect pathways act together to implement response inhibition, whereas the relationship between performance control and the fronto-basal ganglia connections points toward a top-down mechanism that underlies voluntary action control.

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.5253-10.2011

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • In demanding situations of action conflict, the basal ganglia keep all responses in check until further processing has converged on an action decision, and the final call is received from the pre-SMA and other prefrontal regions.

    “and the basal ganglia keep all responses in check until further processing has converged on an action decision, and the final call is received from upstream: from the pre-SMA and other prefrontal regions (Jahfari et al., 2011).”

    From Impulsive action: emotional impulses and their control (2014) · cites this paper as Jahfari et al., 2011

    The Introduction and Discussion (pages unavailable in our copy) link pre-SMA and other frontal regions to basal-ganglia pathways involved in response inhibition, and describe successful stopping as having downstream inhibitory effects on motor cortex. They do not establish that the basal ganglia hold all responses in check until a decision has converged and a final call arrives from prefrontal regions. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Frontostriatal circuits capitalizing on inferior frontal cortex, pre-SMA, and basal ganglia are engaged when impulsive actions are to be interrupted, aborted, suppressed, or overridden by more appropriate actions, even when action control is triggered unconsciously.

    “Frontostriatal circuits in the brain, capitalizing on the inferior frontal cortex, the pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA), and the basal ganglia, are engaged when impulsive actions are to be interrupted, aborted, suppressed, or overridden by more appropriate actions (Jahfari et al., 2011; Ridderinkhof et al., 2011), even when such action control is triggered unconsciously (van Gaal et al., 200”

    From Impulsive action: emotional impulses and their control (2014) · cites this paper as Jahfari et al., 2011

  • In demanding situations of action conflict, the inferior frontal cortex is recruited to aid in implementing response inhibition.

    “the inferior frontal cortex is recruited to aid in implementing response inhibition (Jahfari et al., 2011; Swann et al., 2012)”

    From Impulsive action: emotional impulses and their control (2014) · cites this paper as Jahfari et al., 2011

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
Jahfari, S., Waldorp, L., van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., Scholte, H. S., Ridderinkhof, K. R., & Forstmann, B. U.
Affiliations
University of Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2011-05-04
Volume
31
Issue
18
Pages
6891-6899
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2100219975
Cited by
308
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 20
FWCI
13.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
response inhibition, hyperdirect pathway, indirect pathway, effective connectivity, subthalamic nucleus, caudate nucleus, inferior frontal gyrus, pre-supplementary motor area, stop signal, top-down control
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Corpus Striatum, Female, Frontal Lobe, Globus Pallidus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Inhibition, Psychological, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Reaction Time, Subthalamic Nucleus

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