Browse > Article

Comparison of Random and Blocked Practice during Performance of the Stop Signal Task  

Kwon, Jung-Won (Department of Rehabilitation Science, Graduate School of Daegu University)
Nam, Seok-Hyun (Department of Rehabilitation Science, Graduate School of Daegu University)
Kim, Chung-Sun (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Rehabilitation Science, Daegu University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Physical Therapy / v.23, no.3, 2011 , pp. 65-70 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: We investigated the changes in the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) and the no-signal reaction time (NSRT) following motor sequential learning in the stop-signal task (SST). This study also determined which of the reduction0s of spatial processing time was better between blocked- and random-SST. Methods: Thirty right-handed healthy subjects without a history of neurological dysfunction were recruited. In all subjects, both the SSRT and the NSRT were measured for the SST. Tasks were classified into two categories based on the stop-signal patterns, the blocked-SST practice group and random-SST practice group. All subjects gave written informed consent. Results: In the blocked-SST group, both the SSRT and the NSRT was significantly decreased (p<0.05) but not significantly changed in the random-SST group. In the SSRT and the NSRT, the blocked-SST group was faster than the random-SST group (p<0.05). In the post-test SST after practice of each group, the SSRT was significantly decreased in the random-SST group (p<0.05), but the NSRT showed no significant changes in either group. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that random-SST practice resulted in a decrease in internal processing times needed for a rapid stop to visual signals, indicating motor skill learning is acquired through improved response selection and inhibition.
Keywords
Stop function; Stop signal task; Motor sequential learning;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 4  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kwon JW, Nam SH, Kim CS. The effect of rehabilitation of a stop signal task on the execution and stop function of movement. J Kor Soc Phys Ther. 2011;23(2):37-43.
2 Verbruggen F, Liefooghe B, Vandierendonck A. Selective stopping in task switching: The role of response selection and response execution. Exp Psychol. 2006;53(1):48-57.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Goghari VM, MacDonald AW, 3rd. The neural basis of cognitive control: Response selection and inhibition. Brain Cogn. 2009;71(2):72-83.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Automaticity of cognitive control: Goal priming in response-inhibition paradigms. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009;35(5):1381-8.
5 Cohen JR, Poldrack RA. Automaticity in motor sequence learning does not impair response inhibition. Psychon Bull Rev. 2008;15(1):108-15.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009;35(3):835-54.
7 Seiss E, Praamstra P. The basal ganglia and inhibitory mechanisms in response selection: Evidence from subliminal priming of motor responses in parkinson's disease. Brain. 2004;127(Pt 2):330-9.   DOI
8 Verbruggen F, Logan GD, Liefooghe B et al. Short-term aftereffects of response inhibition: Repetition priming or between-trial control adjustments? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008;34(2):413-26.   DOI
9 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Automatic and controlled response inhibition: Associative learning in the go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008;137(4):649-72.
10 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Long-term aftereffects of response inhibition: Memory retrieval, task goals, and cognitive control. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008;34(5):1229-35.
11 Kwon YH, Jang JS, Kim CS. Changes of cortical activation pattern induced by motor learning with serial reaction time task. J Kor Soc Phys Ther. 2009;21(1):65-72.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Lee MY, Park RJ, Nam KS. The effect of implicit motor sequence learning through perceptual-motor task in patients with subacute stroke. J Kor Soc Phys Ther. 2008;20(3):1-8.
13 Verbruggen F, Logan GD, Stevens MA. Stop-it: Windows executable software for the stop-signal paradigm. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40(2):479-83.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Won JY, Kim EJ. Validation of stop-signal task. Journal of Korean Psychological Association. 2008;27(1):217-34.
15 Claffey MP, Sheldon S, Stinear CM et al. Having a goal to stop action is associated with advance control of specific motor representations. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:541-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Miyake A, Friedman NP, Emerson MJ et al. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "Frontal lobe" Tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol. 2000;41(1):49-100.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Aron AR, Poldrack RA. Cortical and subcortical contributions to stop signal response inhibition: Role of the subthalamic nucleus. J Neurosci. 2006;26(9):2424-33.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Gauggel S, Rieger M, Feghoff TA. Inhibition of ongoing responses in patients with parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75(4):539-44.   DOI
19 Bekker EM, Overtoom CC, Kooij JJ et al. Disentangling deficits in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(10):1129-36.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Chamberlain SR, Fineberg NA, Blackwell AD et al. Motor inhibition and cognitive flexibility in obsessive-compulsive disorder and trichotillomania. Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163(7):1282-4.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 van den Wildenberg WP, van Boxtel GJ, van der Molen MW et al. Stimulation of the subthalamic region facilitates the selection and inhibition of motor responses in parkinson's disease. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006;18(4):626-36.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Barkley RA. Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: constructing a unifying theory of adhd. Psychol Bull. 1997;121(1):65-94.
23 Logan GD, Schachar RJ, Tannock R. Impulsivity and inhibitory control. Psychological Science. 1997;8:60-4.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Williams BR, Ponesse JS, Schachar RJ et al. Development of inhibitory control across the life span. Dev Psychol. 1999;35(1):205-13.
25 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008;12(11):418-24.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2009;33(5):647-61.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Band GP, van der Molen MW, Logan GD. Horse-race model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003;112(2):105-42.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Chikazoe J, Jimura K, Hirose S et al. Preparation to inhibit a response complements response inhibition during performance of a stop-signal task. J Neurosci. 2009;29(50): 15870-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Aron AR. The neural basis of inhibition in cognitive control. Neuroscientist. 2007;13(3):214-28.   DOI   ScienceOn