The P300 as marker of inhibitory control - fact or fiction?
Rene Jürgen HusteriD, Mari S. Messel, Christina ThunbergiD, Liisa RaudiD
Abstract
Inhibitory control, i.e., the ability to stop or suppress actions, thoughts, or memories, represents a prevalent and popular concept in basic and clinical neuroscience as well as psychology. At the same time, it is notoriously difficult to study as successful inhibition is characterized by the absence of a continuously quantifiable direct behavioral marker. It has been suggested that the P3 latency, and here especially its onset latency, may serve as neurophysiological marker of inhibitory control as it correlates with the stop signal reaction time (SSRT). The SSRT estimates the average stopping latency, which itself is unobservable since no overt response is elicited in successful stop trials, based on differences in the distribution of go reaction times and the delay of the stop- relative to the go-signal in stop trials.\n\nIn a meta-analysis and an independent EEG experiment, we found that correlations between the P3-latency and the SSRT are indeed replicable, but also unspecific. Not only does the SSRT also correlate with the N2-latency, but both P3- and N2-latency measures show similar or even higher correlations with other behavioral parameters such as the go reaction time or stopping accuracy. The missing specificity of P3-SSRT correlations, together with the general pattern of associations, suggests that these manifest effects are driven by underlying latent processes other than inhibition, such as those associated with the speed-accuracy trade-off.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 91
- FWCI
- 1.62
- Field percentile
- top 16%
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
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
- Reconsidering electrophysiological markers of response inhibition in light of trigger failures in the stop-signal task
Patrick Skippen, William Ross Fulham, … Frini Karayanidis·PsychophysiologyPeer-reviewed·Jul 29, 2020
- Motor Output Matters: Evidence of a Continuous Relationship Between Stop/No-go P300 Amplitude and Response Force on Failed Inhibitions at the Trial-Level.
An T. Nguyen, Matthew A. Albrecht, … Welber Marinovic·bioRxiv·Jul 29, 2019
- Latency and amplitude of the stop-signal P3 event-related potential are related to inhibitory GABAa activity in primary motor cortex
Megan Hynd, Cheol Soh, … Jan R. Wessel·bioRxiv·Sep 15, 2020
- How salience enhances inhibitory control: An analysis of electro-cortical mechanisms
J. Leon Kenemans, Iris Schutte, … H. N. Alexander Logemann·Biological PsychologyPeer-reviewed·Jan 18, 2023
- Partial response electromyography as a marker of action stopping
Liisa Raud, Christina Thunberg, Rene Jürgen Huster·eLifePeer-reviewed·May 26, 2022
- Differences in unity: the go/no-go and stop signal tasks rely on different inhibitory mechanisms
Liisa Raud, René Westerhausen, … Rene Jürgen Huster·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Jan 24, 2020