Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Apr;232(4):1293-307.
doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-3846-8. Epub 2014 Jan 31.

Effects of probability bias in response readiness and response inhibition on reaching movements

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of probability bias in response readiness and response inhibition on reaching movements

Paolo Federico et al. Exp Brain Res. 2014 Apr.

Abstract

It is solidly established that unequal stimulus frequencies lead to faster responses to the more likely stimulus; however, the effect of this probability bias on response inhibition is still debated. To tackle this issue, we administered two versions of the stop-signal task to 18 right-handed healthy subjects. In one version, we manipulated the frequency of right and left targets appearance when subjects were required to produce speeded responses (no-stop trials) with the right arm, whereas stop signals occurred with equal frequencies after right or left targets (no-stop signal bias). In the other version, we manipulated the frequency of appearance of stop signals after right or left targets, whereas no-stop trials toward right or left targets had the same frequency (stop-signal bias). Surprisingly, we found a very modest, if any, increase in response readiness toward the more frequent stimulus. However, the no-stop signal bias had an effect on the speed of inhibitory control, as subjects were always faster to suppress a movement toward the side where targets were less likely to occur. Differently, the stop-signal bias had a much more powerful effect. In fact, subjects were faster to withhold movements toward the side where targets were more frequent, while they exhibited longer reaction times for reaches toward the more likely targets. Overall, these results suggest that action preparation and action inhibition are independent competing processes, but subjects tend to place automatically greater importance on the stop task.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2008 Oct-Dec;25(7-8):996-1010 - PubMed
    1. J Neurosci. 2009 Dec 16;29(50):15870-7 - PubMed
    1. PLoS One. 2013 May 03;8(5):e62793 - PubMed
    1. Exp Brain Res. 2004 Nov;159(2):135-50 - PubMed
    1. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1986 Aug;12(3):243-58 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources