The relationship between reaction time and response variability and somatosensory No-go potentials

We investigated the relationship between reaction time (RT) and response variability and somatosensory Go/No-go potentials. Event-related potentials following electrical stimulation of the second (Go stimulus) or fifth (No-go stimulus) digit of the left hand were recorded from 16 subjects, and Go and No-go stimuli were presented at an even probability. The subjects were instructed to respond to the Go stimuli by pushing a button with their right thumb. We analyzed the correlation between RT and the N140 and P300 components, and between the standard deviation (SD) of RT and the N140 and P300. Neither the amplitude nor latency of the No-go-N140 (N140 evoked by No-go stimuli) or the Go-N140 (N140 evoked by Go stimuli) related significantly with RT and the SD of RT. There was a significant negative correlation between RT and the amplitude of the No-go-P300 (P300 evoked by No-go stimuli) at Fz and C3, indicating that subjects with a shorter RT had a No-go-P300 of larger amplitude. The latency of the Go-P300 (P300 evoked by Go stimuli) at Pz and C3 showed a significant correlation with RT. The SD of RT was significantly correlated with the amplitudes of the No-go-P300 at C3 and Go-P300 at Pz and C4, and the latency of the No-go-P300 at Cz and Go-P300 at Fz, Cz, Pz, C3, and C4. Our results suggest that response speed and variability for the Go stimulus in Go/No-go paradigms affect No-go-related neural activity for the No-go stimulus.

[1]  Effects of the interstimulus interval on somatosensory go/no-go event-related potentials , 2010, Neuroreport.

[2]  Hiroki Nakata,et al.  Differential modulation of temporal and frontal components of the somatosensory N140 and the effect of interstimulus interval in a selective attention task. , 2004, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[3]  Tetsuo Kida,et al.  Somatosensory N250 and P300 during discrimination tasks. , 2003, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[4]  Robert J. Barry,et al.  Response priming in the Go/NoGo task: The N2 reflects neither inhibition nor conflict , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[5]  A Pfefferbaum,et al.  Manipulation of P3 latency: speed vs. accuracy instructions. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[6]  E. Jodo,et al.  Relation of a negative ERP component to response inhibition in a Go/No-go task. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[7]  Michael Falkenstein,et al.  Inhibition-Related ERP Components: Variation with Modality, Age, and Time-on-Task , 2002 .

[8]  R. Barry,et al.  Effects of pre-stimulus processing on subsequent events in a warned Go/NoGo paradigm: response preparation, execution and inhibition. , 2006, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[9]  Koji Inui,et al.  Somato‐motor inhibitory processing in humans: a study with MEG and ERP , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[10]  E Donchin,et al.  A metric for thought: a comparison of P300 latency and reaction time. , 1981, Science.

[11]  Hiroki Nakamoto,et al.  Effects of stimulus–response compatibility in mediating expert performance in baseball players , 2008, Brain Research.

[12]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[13]  Ray Johnson,et al.  Differential effects of practice on the executive processes used for truthful and deceptive responses: an event-related brain potential study. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[14]  A. Fallgatter,et al.  Three-dimensional tomography of event-related potentials during response inhibition: evidence for phasic frontal lobe activation. , 1998, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[15]  Gian Luca Romani,et al.  Somato-motor inhibitory processing in humans: An event-related functional MRI study , 2008, NeuroImage.

[16]  B S Kopell,et al.  Long-latency evoked potentials and reaction time. , 1978, Psychophysiology.

[17]  R. Kakigi,et al.  The characteristics of no-go potentials with intraepidermal stimulation , 2009, Neuroreport.

[18]  G. McCarthy,et al.  Augmenting mental chronometry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus evaluation time. , 1977, Science.

[19]  Hiroki Nakata,et al.  Characteristics of No-go-P300 component during somatosensory Go/No-go paradigms , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[20]  Geert J. M. van Boxtel,et al.  The N2 in go/no-go tasks reflects conflict monitoring not response inhibition , 2004, Brain and Cognition.

[21]  Hisae Gemba,et al.  Potential related to no-go reaction of go/no-go hand movement task with color discrimination in human , 1989, Neuroscience Letters.

[22]  K. R. Ridderinkhof,et al.  Frontal Cortex Mediates Unconsciously Triggered Inhibitory Control , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  H. Jasper,et al.  The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation. The International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. , 1999, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Supplement.

[24]  Koji Inui,et al.  The characteristics of the nogo-N140 component in somatosensory go/nogo tasks , 2006, Neuroscience Letters.

[25]  A. Kok.  Effects of degradation of visual stimuli on components of the event-related potential (ERP) in go/nogo reaction tasks , 1986, Biological Psychology.

[26]  G. Band,et al.  Speed-accuracy modulation in case of conflict: the roles of activation and inhibition , 2003, Psychological research.

[27]  Y. Miyashita,et al.  Common inhibitory mechanism in human inferior prefrontal cortex revealed by event-related functional MRI. , 1999, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[28]  T. Braver,et al.  Anterior cingulate cortex and response conflict: effects of frequency, inhibition and errors. , 2001, Cerebral cortex.

[29]  Hisae Gemba,et al.  Potential related to no-go reaction in go/no-go hand movement with discrimination between tone stimuli of different frequencies in the monkey , 1990, Brain Research.

[30]  K. R. Ridderinkhof,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency , 2003, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

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

[32]  J. Ford,et al.  Effects of perceptual and cognitive difficulty on P3 and RT in young and old adults. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[33]  H Hämäläinen,et al.  Is the somatosensory N250 related to deviance discrimination or conscious target detection? , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[34]  H. Bokura,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates for response inhibition in a Go/NoGo task , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[35]  C. Doucet,et al.  The effect of response execution on P3 latency, reaction time, and movement time. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[36]  J. Hohnsbein,et al.  Late ERP components in visual and auditory Go/Nogo tasks. , 1995, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[37]  A. A. Wijers,et al.  Inhibition, response mode, and stimulus probability: a comparative event-related potential study , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[38]  Tetsuo Kida,et al.  Differential influences of exercise intensity on information processing in the central nervous system , 2004, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[39]  S. Segalowitz,et al.  Attentional factors in response time variability after traumatic brain injury: An ERP study , 1997, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[40]  B. Kopp,et al.  N2, P3 and the lateralized readiness potential in a nogo task involving selective response priming. , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[41]  E. Stein,et al.  Right hemispheric dominance of inhibitory control: an event-related functional MRI study. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  Shane M. O’Mara,et al.  Individual differences discriminate event-related potentials but not performance during response inhibition , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[43]  Koji Inui,et al.  Higher anticipated force required a stronger inhibitory process in go/nogo tasks , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[44]  Dezhong Yao,et al.  A study on the neural mechanism of inhibition of return by the event-related potential in the Go/Nogo task , 2008, Biological Psychology.

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

[46]  Koji Inui,et al.  Effects of ISI and stimulus probability on event-related go/nogo potentials after somatosensory stimulation , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[47]  M. Scherg,et al.  Localizing P300 Generators in Visual Target and Distractor Processing: A Combined Event-Related Potential and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[48]  D. Stuss,et al.  Age-related differences in processing irrelevant information: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[49]  D Friedman,et al.  A brain event related to the making of a sensory discrimination. , 1979, Science.

[50]  J. Ford,et al.  ERPs to response production and inhibition. , 1985, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[51]  Koji Inui,et al.  Effects of a go/nogo task on event-related potentials following somatosensory stimulation , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[52]  J. Hohnsbein,et al.  ERP components in Go/Nogo tasks and their relation to inhibition. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[53]  M Spitzer,et al.  The time course of brain activations during response inhibition: evidence from event‐related potentials in a go/no go task , 1998, Neuroreport.

[54]  A. Fallgatter,et al.  The NoGo-anteriorization as a neurophysiological standard-index for cognitive response control. , 1999, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.