Biological PsychologyNeurosciencePeer-reviewed journal article
Stopping and Changing Expected and Unexpected Movements
Simon WeberiD, Nicholas VucakiD, Sauro E. SalomoniiD, Alison J Ross, Emily Coleman, Mark R. HinderiD
Abstract
The capacity to cancel or adapt planned actions in response to changing environmental demands is essential for navigating our complex world. While past research has shown that an individuals expectations of upcoming movement demands influence the speed of action initiation, the effect this has on subsequent cancellation or adaption of that movement remains unknown. 25 healthy adults completed stop signal tasks and stop change tasks in which biasing cues (e.g., "70% left") accurately indicated the probability that a left, or right button press would be required. As expected, responses that were congruent with the cue were faster than incongruent responses; however, biasing cues had no effect on behavioural or physiological (electromyographical) indices of stopping speed. Stopping latencies were found to be faster in the stop change task than the stop signal task, corroborating other recent work. However, a second experiment (25 healthy adults) which used the same stimuli for both tasks (varying only the instructions), revealed no difference - highlighting the sensitivity of the stop process to stimulus effects, and a common confound in the literature. We also observed that physiological indices of action reprogramming (following a stop) were faster in congruent than incongruent trials. Collectively, these results suggests that preparatory changes that accompany expected movements influence the enaction of movement both prior to, and after stopping, but the stop mechanism itself, remains independent of these preparations. These results inform how action cancellation and adaption are applied in real world environments, where expectations continually interface with our motor plans. HighlightsO_LI* Anticipating a movement increases the speed of its enaction but not subsequent cancellation C_LIO_LI* Expected movements can be reprogrammed more quickly than unexpected movements C_LIO_LI* The latency of action cancellation is highly sensitive to stimulus effects C_LI
- Citations
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Field percentile
- 41th percentile
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Faster action reprogramming, but not stopping, with proactive cues: Combining EMG and computational modelling in response-selective stop signal tasks
Sauro E. Salomoni, Quentin F. Gronau, … Mark R. Hinder·bioRxiv·Jul 11, 2023
- Stopping Speed in Response to Auditory and Visual Stop Signals Depends on Go Signal Modality
Simon Weber, Sauro E. Salomoni, … Mark R. Hinder·Journal of Cognitive NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2024
- The Stop Signal Stepping Task: how action cancellation commands disrupt step initiation in young and healthy older adults
Rebecca Healey, Marlee Jay Wells, … Rebecca J. St George·GeroSciencePeer-reviewed·Mar 19, 2026
- Selective Cancellation of Reactive and Anticipated Movement: Differences in Speed of Action Reprogramming, but not Stopping.
Simon Weber, Sauro E. Salomoni, Mark R. Hinder·CortexPeer-reviewed·Jun 1, 2024
- The Contextual Specificity of Pausing: Interpreting Electromyographic Partial Responses During Action Cancellation and Attentional Capture
Simon Weber, Keegan Haugh, … Mark R. Hinder·bioRxiv·Jul 29, 2026
- When Stopping Requires Going; Physiological Similarities Between Action Cancellation and the Cancellation of Action Cancellation
Simon Weber, Sauro E. Salomoni, Mark R. Hinder·European Journal of NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2025