Event-related fields evoked by vocal response inhibition: a comparison of younger and older adults
- 290 Downloads
The current study examined event-related fields (ERFs) evoked by vocal response inhibition in a stimulus-selective stop-signal task. We compared inhibition-related ERFs across a younger and an older group of adults. Behavioural results revealed that stop-signal reaction times (RTs), go-RTs, ignore-stop RTs and failed stop RTs were longer in the older, relative to the younger group by 38, 123, 149 and 116 ms, respectively. The amplitude of the ERF M2 peak (approximately 200 ms after the stop signal) evoked on successful stop trials was larger compared to that evoked on both failed stop and ignore-stop trials. The M4 peak (approximately 450 ms after stop signal) was of larger amplitude in both successful and failed stops compared to ignore-stop trials. In the older group, the M2, M3 and M4 peaks were smaller in amplitude and peaked later in time (by 24, 50 and 76 ms, respectively). We demonstrate that vocal response inhibition-related ERFs exhibit a similar temporal evolution to those previously described for manual response inhibition: an early peak at 200 ms (i.e. M2) that differentiates successful from failed stopping, and a later peak (i.e. M4) that is consistent with a neural marker of response checking and error processing. Across groups, our data support a more general decline of stimulus processing speed with age.
KeywordsResponse inhibition Speech Magnetoencephalography Event-related fields Ageing and stop-signal task
This research was supported by Macquarie University Research Excellence Scholarships (MQRES), National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (#1003760), and the Australian Research Council (DE130100868).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Gläscher J, Gitelman D (2008) Contrast weights in flexible factorial design with multiple groups of subjects. http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0803&L=SPM&P=R16629
- Hartsuiker RJ, Bastiaanse R, Postma A, Wijnen F (2005) Phonological encoding and monitoring in normal and pathological speech. Psychology Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Liotti M, Pliszka SR, Higgins K, Perez Iii R, Semrud-Clikeman M (2010) Evidence for specificity of ERP abnormalities during response inhibition in ADHD children: a comparison with reading disorder children without ADHD. Brain Cogn 72(2):228–237. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.09.007 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Logan GD (1994) On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A users’ guide to the stop signal paradigm. In: Dagenbach D, Carr TH (eds) Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 189–239Google Scholar
- Luck SJ (2005) An introduction to the event-related potential technique, 1st edn. MIT Press, MassachussetsGoogle Scholar
- McLaren, D. (2014). Re: flexible factorial desgins (SPM mailing list archive). http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1401&L=spm&P=R36001&1=spm&9=A&J=on&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4
- Teplan M (2002) Fundamentals of EEG measurement. Measurement science review 2(2):1–11Google Scholar
- Uehara G, Adachi Y, Kawai J, Shimogawara M, Higuchi M, Haruta Y, Hisashi K (2003) Multi-channel SQUID systems for biomagnetic measurement. IEICE Trans Electron 86(1):43–54Google Scholar