Reactive and proactive control mechanisms of response inhibition in gambling disorder

Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control Strategies: Exploring the Impact of Interindividual Variables on an ERP Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT)

According to the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) framework, cognitive control can be divided into two strategies: proactive cognitive control, which relies mainly on the active maintenance of contextual information relevant to the ongoing task; and reactive cognitive control, which is a form of transient control triggered by an external cue. Although cognitive control has been studied extensively, little is known about the specificities of inhibition within the framework of the DMC model and the influence of interindividual variables on inhibitory control.Thanks to an inhibitory version of the continuous performance task (CPT), we studied behavioral performances and Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) related to proactive and reactive inhibition, and their links to psychological profile and cognitive performances. One hundred and five young adults underwent the task, along with a short clinical and cognitive evaluation.We were able to observe ERPs related to proactive (cue-N1, cue-N2, cue-P3, and the contingent negative variation) and reactive inhibitory control (target-N2 and target-P3). Our results showed that proactive strategies appeared to be linked with impulsivity, working memory abilities, dominant response inhibition, gender, and the consumption pattern of nicotine. Reactive strategies appeared to be linked with attentional and working memories abilities.Overall, the inhibitory AX-CPT allowed a specific investigation of cognitive control within the framework of the DMC based on behavioral and ERP variables. This provided us an opportunity to investigate the principal ERP components related to proactive and reactive inhibitory control strategies as well as to link them with specific clinical and cognitive variables.

Slower adaptation of control strategies in individuals with high impulsive tendencies

Flexible use of reactive and proactive control according to environmental demands is the key to adaptive behavior. In this study, forty-eight adults performed ten blocks of an AX-CPT task to reveal the strength of proactive control by the calculation of the proactive behavioral index (PBI). They also filled out the UPPS questionnaire to assess their impulsiveness. The median-split method based on the global UPPS score distribution was used to categorize participants as having high (HI) or low (LI) impulsiveness traits. The analyses revealed that the PBI was negatively correlated with the UPPS scores, suggesting that the higher is the impulsiveness, the weaker the dominance of proactive control processes. We showed, at an individual level, that the PBI increased across blocks and suggested that this effect was due to a smaller decrease in reactive control processes. Notably, the PBI increase was slower in the HI group than in the LI group. Moreover, participants who did not adapt to task demands were all characterized as high impulsive. Overall, the current study demonstrates that (1) impulsiveness is associated with less dominant proactive control due to (2) slower adaptation to task demands (3) driven by a stronger reliance on reactive processes. These findings are discussed in regards to pathological populations.

Mouse Tracking to Explore Motor Inhibition Processes in Go/No-Go and Stop Signal Tasks

Response inhibition relies on both proactive and reactive mechanisms that exert a synergic control on goal-directed actions. It is typically evaluated by the go/no-go (GNG) and the stop signal task (SST) with response recording based on the key-press method. However, the analysis of discrete variables (i.e., present or absent responses) registered by key-press could be insufficient to capture dynamic aspects of inhibitory control. Trying to overcome this limitation, in the present study we used a mouse tracking procedure to characterize movement profiles related to proactive and reactive inhibition. A total of fifty-three participants performed a cued GNG and an SST. The cued GNG mainly involves proactive control whereas the reactive component is mainly engaged in the SST. We evaluated the velocity profile from mouse trajectories both for responses obtained in the Go conditions and for inhibitory failures. Movements were classified as one-shot when no corrections were observed. Multi-peaked velocity profiles were classified as non-one-shot. A higher proportion of one-shot movements was found in the SST compared to the cued GNG when subjects failed to inhibit responses. This result suggests that proactive control may be responsible for unsmooth profiles in inhibition failures, supporting a differentiation between these tasks.

Response inhibition in humans: a whistle stop review

This Neuro Forum presents insights from recent literature on the neurophysiology and pathoneurophysiology of reactive (speed of action stopping) and proactive (slowing of action in anticipation of stopping) response inhibition. We discuss recent studies using novel brain stimulation and spectroscopy techniques that reveal the role of cortico-subcortical networks and the neurotransmitter γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and how these mechanisms are influenced by healthy aging. Furthermore, we also briefly discuss computational modeling approaches, which assist in establishing meaningful differences in response inhibition.