Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.18857/jkpt.2020.32.2.70

Dose Motor Inhibition Response Training Using Stop-signal Paradigm Influence Execution and Stop Performance?  

Son, Sung Min (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science, Cheongju University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Physical Therapy / v.32, no.2, 2020 , pp. 70-74 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined whether 1) the motor inhibition response as cognitive-behavioral component is learning though a stop signal task using stop-signal paradigm, and 2) whether there is a difference in the learning degree according to imagery training and actual practice training. Methods: Twenty young adults (males: 9, females: 11) volunteered to participate in this study, and were divided randomly into motor imagery training (IT, n=10) and practice training (PT, n=10) groups. The PT group performed an actual practice stop-signal task, while the IT group performed imagery training, which showed a stop-signal task on a monitor of a personal computer. The non-signal reaction time and stop-signal reaction time of both groups were assessed during the stop-signal task. Results: In the non-signal reaction time, there were no significant intra-group and inter-group differences between pre- and post-intervention in both groups (p>0.05). The stop-signal reaction time showed a significant difference in the PT group in the intra-group analysis (p<0.05). On the other hand, there was no significant intra-group difference in the IT group and inter-group difference between pre- and post-intervention (p>0.05). Conclusion: These results showed that the motor inhibition response could be learned through a stop-signal task. Moreover, these findings suggest that actual practice is a more effective method for learning the motor inhibition response.
Keywords
Motor imagery; Stop-signal paradigm; Stop signal task; Motor inhibition response;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Duncan J, Owen AM. Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands. Trends Neurosci. 2000;23(10): 475-83.   DOI
2 Goghari VM, MacDonald AW 3rd. The neural basis of cognitive control: Response selection and inhibition. Brain Cogn. 2009;71(2):72-83.   DOI
3 Aron AR. The neural basis of inhibition in cognitive control. Neuroscientist. 2007;13(3):214-28.   DOI
4 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
5 Badry R, Mima T, Aso T et al. Suppression of human cortico-motoneuronal excitability during the stop-signal task. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009; 120(9):1717-23.   DOI
6 Barkley RA. Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of adhd. Psychol Bull. 1997; 121(1):65-94.   DOI
7 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
8 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
9 Logan GD, Van Zandt T, Verbruggen F et al. On the ability to inhibit thought and action: General and special theories of an act of control. Psychol Rev. 2014;121(1):66-95.   DOI
10 Band GP, van der Molen MW, Logan GD. Horse-race model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. Acta Psychol. 2003;112(2):105-42.   DOI
11 Verbruggen F, Logan GD. Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008;12(11):418-24.   DOI
12 Alexander GE, Crutcher MD, DeLong MR. Basal ganglia-thalamocortical circuits: Parallel substrates for motor, oculomotor, "prefrontal" and "limbic" functions. Prog Brain Res. 1991;85:119-46.   DOI
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
14 Rubia K, Smith AB, Taylor E et al. Linear age-correlated functional development of right inferior fronto-striato-cerebellar networks during response inhibition and anterior cingulate during error-related processes. Hum Brain Mapp. 2007;28(11):1163-77.   DOI
15 Enticott PG, Ogloff JR, Bradshaw JL. Response inhibition and impulsivity in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 2008;157(1-3):251-4.   DOI
16 Geurts HM, Verte S, Oosterlaan J et al. How specific are executive functioning deficits in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism? J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(4):836-54.   DOI
17 Aron AR, Poldrack RA. The cognitive neuroscience of response inhibition: Relevance for genetic research in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2005;57(11):1285-92.   DOI
18 Kieling C, Goncalves RR, Tannock R et al. Neurobiology of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2008;17(2):285-307.   DOI
19 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
20 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.   DOI
21 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.   DOI
22 Guillot A, Collet C. Contribution from neurophysiological and psychological methods to the study of motor imagery. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2005;50(2):387-97.   DOI
23 Nyberg L, Eriksson J, Larsson A et al. Learning by doing versus learning by thinking: An fmri study of motor and mental training. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(5):711-7.   DOI
24 Solodkin A, Hlustik P, Chen EE et al. Fine modulation in network activation during motor execution and motor imagery. Cereb Cortex. 2004;14(11):1246-55.   DOI
25 Mendoza D, Wichman H. "Inner" darts: Effects of mental practice on performance of dart throwing. Percept Mot Skills. 1978;47(3 Pt 2):1195-9.   DOI
26 Kim CS, Yeo SS, Park SY. The effects of motor learning through the mental imagery training on task performance and motor learning component. Journal of Special Education & Rehabilitation Science. 2010;49(4): 221-36.
27 Richard Schmidt TL. Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis.4th ed. Human kinetics, 2005.
28 Wilson PH, Adams IL, Caeyenberghs K et al. Motor imagery training enhances motor skill in children with dcd: A replication study. Res Dev Disabil. 2016;57:54-62.   DOI
29 Bonnet M, Decety J, Jeannerod M et al. Mental simulation of an action modulates the excitability of spinal reflex pathways in man. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1997;5(3):221-8.   DOI
30 Seger CA. Implicit learning. Psychol Bull. 1994;115(2):163-96.   DOI