Moderate variability in stimulus presentation improves motor response control

To examine the impact of interstimulus “jitter” (i.e., randomization of the interval between successive stimulus events) on response control during continuous task performance, 41 healthy adults completed four go/no-go tasks that were identical except for interstimulus interval (ISI) jitter: a 0% jitter task with a fixed (1,000-ms) ISI, a 10% jitter task with an ISI range of 900–1,100 ms, a 30% jitter task with an ISI range of 700–1,300 ms, and a 50% jitter task with an ISI range of 500–1,500 ms. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a quadratic effect of jitter on commissions across the group and on intrasubject reaction time variability in men; in both cases, performance was best for the 10% jitter condition. A linear effect of jitter was observed for reaction time (RT) with high levels of jitter (50%) resulting in longer RT. Findings suggest that response selection, including inhibition, is optimized by moderate increases in ISI jitter. More deliberate and controlled responding observed with increasing jitter may have important treatment implications for disorders (e.g., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, ADHD), associated with impaired response control.

[1]  Stewart H. Mostofsky,et al.  Evidence that response inhibition is a primary deficit in ADHD , 2007, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[2]  O. Hikosaka,et al.  Switching from automatic to controlled action by monkey medial frontal cortex , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[3]  T Allison,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging studies of functional brain activation: analysis and interpretation. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Supplement.

[4]  R. Barkley,et al.  Effects of two doses of methylphenidate on simulator driving performance in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. , 2005, Journal of safety research.

[5]  J. Zacks Neuroimaging Studies of Mental Rotation: A Meta-analysis and Review , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  Christoph Klein,et al.  Intra-Subject Variability in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder , 2006, Biological Psychiatry.

[7]  Stewart H. Mostofsky,et al.  Response Inhibition and Response Selection: Two Sides of the Same Coin , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  M. Bellgrove,et al.  The functional neuroanatomical correlates of response variability: evidence from a response inhibition task , 2004, Neuropsychologia.

[9]  D. Stuss,et al.  Staying on the job: the frontal lobes control individual performance variability. , 2003, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  J. Pekar,et al.  Functional brain correlates of response time variability in children , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[11]  B. J. Casey,et al.  Neural and behavioral correlates of expectancy violations in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. , 2007, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[12]  J. Tanji,et al.  A motor area rostral to the supplementary motor area (presupplementary motor area) in the monkey: neuronal activity during a learned motor task. , 1992, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[14]  Herbert Roeyers,et al.  The relationship of working memory, inhibition, and response variability in child psychopathology , 2006, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[15]  Herbert Roeyers,et al.  Event rate and event-related potentials in ADHD. , 2006, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[16]  E Wyllie,et al.  Functional anatomy of the human supplementary sensorimotor area: results of extraoperative electrical stimulation. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  R Parasuraman,et al.  Dynamics of the spatial scale of visual attention revealed by brain event-related potentials. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[18]  P. Lachenbruch Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[19]  J. Pekar,et al.  fMRI evidence that the neural basis of response inhibition is task-dependent. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[20]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  Temporal attention enhances early visual processing: A review and new evidence from event-related potentials , 2006, Brain Research.