TY - JOUR
T1 - A touching advantage
T2 - cross-modal stop-signals improve reactive response inhibition
AU - Friehs, Maximilian A.
AU - Schmalbrock, Philipp
AU - Merz, Simon
AU - Dechant, Martin
AU - Hartwigsen, Gesa
AU - Frings, Christian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/3
Y1 - 2024/3
N2 - The ability to inhibit an already initiated response is crucial for navigating the environment. However, it is unclear which characteristics make stop-signals more likely to be processed efficiently. In three consecutive studies, we demonstrate that stop-signal modality and location are key factors that influence reactive response inhibition. Study 1 shows that tactile stop-signals lead to better performance compared to visual stop-signals in an otherwise visual choice-reaction task. Results of Study 2 reveal that the location of the stop-signal matters. Specifically, if a visual stop-signal is presented at a different location compared to the visual go-signal, then stopping performance is enhanced. Extending these results, study 3 suggests that tactile stop-signals and location-distinct visual stop-signals retain their performance enhancing effect when visual distractors are presented at the location of the go-signal. In sum, these results confirm that stop-signal modality and location influence reactive response inhibition, even in the face of concurrent distractors. Future research may extend and generalize these findings to other cross-modal setups.
AB - The ability to inhibit an already initiated response is crucial for navigating the environment. However, it is unclear which characteristics make stop-signals more likely to be processed efficiently. In three consecutive studies, we demonstrate that stop-signal modality and location are key factors that influence reactive response inhibition. Study 1 shows that tactile stop-signals lead to better performance compared to visual stop-signals in an otherwise visual choice-reaction task. Results of Study 2 reveal that the location of the stop-signal matters. Specifically, if a visual stop-signal is presented at a different location compared to the visual go-signal, then stopping performance is enhanced. Extending these results, study 3 suggests that tactile stop-signals and location-distinct visual stop-signals retain their performance enhancing effect when visual distractors are presented at the location of the go-signal. In sum, these results confirm that stop-signal modality and location influence reactive response inhibition, even in the face of concurrent distractors. Future research may extend and generalize these findings to other cross-modal setups.
KW - UT-Hybrid-D
KW - Distractors
KW - Inhibition
KW - Stop-signal
KW - Cross-modal
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85182482408
U2 - 10.1007/s00221-023-06767-7
DO - 10.1007/s00221-023-06767-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 38227008
AN - SCOPUS:85182482408
SN - 0014-4819
VL - 242
SP - 599
EP - 618
JO - Experimental brain research
JF - Experimental brain research
IS - 3
ER -