Exploring stop signal reaction time over two sessions of the anticipatory response inhibition task

Various behavioural tasks measure response inhibition encompassing the ability to cancel unwanted actions, evaluated via stop signal reaction time (SSRT). It is unclear whether SSRT is an unchangeable inherent measure of inhibitory network integrity or whether it can improve with repetition. The current study explored if and how SSRT changed over two sessions for the Anticipatory Response Inhibition Task (ARIT), and how this compared with the Stop Signal Task (SST). Forty-four participants repeated the ARIT and SST over two sessions. SSRT and its constituent measures (Go trial reaction time, stop signal delay) were calculated. SSRT reflecting non-selective response inhibition was consistent between sessions in the ARIT and SST (both p &gt; 0.293). Reaction time and stop signal delay also remained stable across sessions in the ARIT (all p &gt; 0.063), whereas in the SST, reaction time (p = 0.013) and stop signal delay (p = 0.009) increased. SSRT reflecting behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT improved (p &lt; 0.001) over two sessions, which was underpinned by changes to reaction time (p &lt; 0.001) and stop signal delay (p &lt; 0.001). Overall, the maximal efficiency of non-selective inhibition remained stable across two sessions in the ARIT. Results of the SST confirmed that non-selective inhibition can, however, be affected by more than inhibitory network integrity. Behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT changed across sessions, suggesting the sequential neural process captured by the SSRT occurred more quickly in session two. These findings have implications for future studies that necessitate behavioural measures over multiple sessions.</p

Exploring stop signal reaction time over two sessions of the anticipatory response inhibition task

Various behavioural tasks measure response inhibition encompassing the ability to cancel unwanted actions, evaluated via stop signal reaction time (SSRT). It is unclear whether SSRT is an unchangeable inherent measure of inhibitory network integrity or whether it can improve with repetition. The current study explored if and how SSRT changed over two sessions for the Anticipatory Response Inhibition Task (ARIT), and how this compared with the Stop Signal Task (SST). Forty-four participants repeated the ARIT and SST over two sessions. SSRT and its constituent measures (Go trial reaction time, stop signal delay) were calculated. SSRT reflecting non-selective response inhibition was consistent between sessions in the ARIT and SST (both p > 0.293). Reaction time and stop signal delay also remained stable across sessions in the ARIT (all p > 0.063), whereas in the SST, reaction time (p = 0.013) and stop signal delay (p = 0.009) increased. SSRT reflecting behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT improved (p < 0.001) over two sessions, which was underpinned by changes to reaction time (p < 0.001) and stop signal delay (p < 0.001). Overall, the maximal efficiency of non-selective inhibition remained stable across two sessions in the ARIT. Results of the SST confirmed that non-selective inhibition can, however, be affected by more than inhibitory network integrity. Behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT changed across sessions, suggesting the sequential neural process captured by the SSRT occurred more quickly in session two. These findings have implications for future studies that necessitate behavioural measures over multiple sessions.publishedVersio

Exploring stop signal reaction time over two sessions of the anticipatory response inhibition task

Various behavioural tasks measure response inhibition encompassing the ability to cancel unwanted actions, evaluated via stop signal reaction time (SSRT). It is unclear whether SSRT is an unchangeable inherent measure of inhibitory network integrity or whether it can improve with repetition. The current study explored if and how SSRT changed over two sessions for the Anticipatory Response Inhibition Task (ARIT), and how this compared with the Stop Signal Task (SST). Forty-four participants repeated the ARIT and SST over two sessions. SSRT and its constituent measures (Go trial reaction time, stop signal delay) were calculated. SSRT reflecting non-selective response inhibition was consistent between sessions in the ARIT and SST (both p &gt; 0.293). Reaction time and stop signal delay also remained stable across sessions in the ARIT (all p &gt; 0.063), whereas in the SST, reaction time (p = 0.013) and stop signal delay (p = 0.009) increased. SSRT reflecting behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT improved (p &lt; 0.001) over two sessions, which was underpinned by changes to reaction time (p &lt; 0.001) and stop signal delay (p &lt; 0.001). Overall, the maximal efficiency of non-selective inhibition remained stable across two sessions in the ARIT. Results of the SST confirmed that non-selective inhibition can, however, be affected by more than inhibitory network integrity. Behaviourally selective stopping on the ARIT changed across sessions, suggesting the sequential neural process captured by the SSRT occurred more quickly in session two. These findings have implications for future studies that necessitate behavioural measures over multiple sessions.</p

Performance on the balloon analogue risk task and anticipatory response inhibition task is associated with severity of impulse control behaviours in people with Parkinson's disease

Dopamine agonist medication is one of the largest risk factors for development of problematic impulse control behaviours (ICBs) in people with Parkinson’s disease. The present study investigated the potential of dopamine gene profiling and individual performance on impulse control tasks to explain ICB severity. Clinical, genetic and task performance data were entered into a mixed-effects linear regression model for people with Parkinson’s disease taking (n = 50) or not taking (n = 25) dopamine agonist medication. Severity of ICBs was captured via the Questionnaire for Impulsive-compulsive disorders in Parkinson’s disease Rating Scale. A cumulative dopamine genetic risk score (DGRS) was calculated for each participant from variance in five dopamine-regulating genes. Objective measures of impulsive action and impulsive choice were measured on the Anticipatory Response Inhibition Task and Balloon Analogue Risk Task, respectively. For participants on dopamine agonist medication, task performance reflecting greater impulsive choice (p = 0.014), and to a trend level greater impulsive action (p = 0.056), as well as a longer history of DA medication (p < 0.001) all predicted increased ICB severity. DGRS however, did not predict ICB severity (p = 0.708). No variables could explain ICB severity in the non-agonist group. Our task-derived measures of impulse control have the potential to predict ICB severity in people with Parkinson’s and warrant further investigation to determine whether they can be used to monitor ICB changes over time. The DGRS appears better suited to predicting the incidence, rather than severity, of ICBs on agonist medication.publishedVersio

Dietary Cocoa Flavanols Do Not Alter Brain Excitability in Young Healthy Adults

The ingestion of dietary cocoa flavanols acutely alters functions of the cerebral endothelium, but whether the effects of flavanols permeate beyond this to alter other brain functions remains unclear. Based on converging evidence, this work tested the hypothesis that cocoa flavanols would alter brain excitability in young healthy adults. In a randomised, cross-over, double-blinded, placebo-controlled design, transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to assess corticospinal and intracortical excitability before as well as 1 and 2 h post-ingestion of a beverage containing either high (695 mg flavanols, 150 mg (−)-epicatechin) or low levels (5 mg flavanols, 0 mg (−)-epicatechin) of cocoa flavanols. In addition to this acute intervention, the effects of a short-term chronic intervention where the same cocoa flavanol doses were ingested once a day for 5 consecutive days were also investigated. For both the acute and chronic interventions, the results revealed no robust alteration in corticospinal or intracortical excitability. One possibility is that cocoa flavanols yield no net effect on brain excitability, but predominantly alter functions of the cerebral endothelium in young healthy adults. Future studies should increase intervention durations to maximize the acute and chronic accumulation of flavanols in the brain, and further investigate if cocoa flavanols would be more effective at altering brain excitability in older adults and clinical populations than in younger adults