Biophysical Modeling of Frontocentral ERP Generation Links Circuit-Level Mechanisms of Action-Stopping to a Behavioral Race Model.

Human frontocentral event-related potentials (FC-ERPs) are ubiquitous neural correlates of cognition and control, but their generating multiscale mechanisms remain mostly unknown. We used the Human Neocortical Neurosolver's biophysical model of a canonical neocortical circuit under exogenous thalamic and cortical drive to simulate the cell and circuit mechanisms underpinning the P2, N2, and P3 features of the FC-ERP observed after Stop-Signals in the Stop-Signal task (SST; N = 234 humans, 137 female). We demonstrate that a sequence of simulated external thalamocortical and corticocortical drives can produce the FC-ERP, similar to what has been shown for primary sensory cortices. We used this model of the FC-ERP to examine likely circuit-mechanisms underlying FC-ERP features that distinguish between successful and failed action-stopping. We also tested their adherence to the predictions of the horse-race model of the SST, with specific hypotheses motivated by theoretical links between the P3 and Stop process. These simulations revealed that a difference in P3 onset between successful and failed Stops is most likely due to a later arrival of thalamocortical drive in failed Stops, rather than, for example, a difference in the effective strength of the input. In contrast, the same model predicted that early thalamocortical drives underpinning the P2 and N2 differed in both strength and timing across stopping accuracy conditions. Overall, this model generates novel testable predictions of the thalamocortical dynamics underlying FC-ERP generation during action-stopping. Moreover, it provides a detailed cellular and circuit-level interpretation that supports links between these macroscale signatures and predictions of the behavioral race model.

The human subthalamic nucleus transiently inhibits active attentional processes.

The subthalamic nucleus (STN) of the basal ganglia is key to the inhibitory control of movement. Consequently, it is a primary target for the neurosurgical treatment of movement disorders like Parkinson's Disease, where modulating the STN via deep-brain stimulation (DBS) can release excess inhibition of thalamo-cortical motor circuits. However, the STN is also anatomically connected to other thalamo-cortical circuits, including those underlying cognitive processes like attention. Notably, STN-DBS can also affect these processes. This suggests that the STN may also contribute to the inhibition of non-motor activity, and that STN-DBS may cause changes to this inhibition. We here tested this hypothesis in humans. We used a novel, wireless outpatient method to record intracranial local field potentials (LFP) from STN DBS implants during a visual attention task (Experiment 1, N=12). These outpatient measurements allowed the simultaneous recording of high-density EEG, which we used to derive the steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP), a well-established neural index of visual attentional engagement. By relating STN activity to this neural marker of attention (instead of overt behavior), we avoided possible confounds resulting from STN's motor role. We aimed to test whether the STN contributes to the momentary inhibition of the SSVEP caused by unexpected, distracting sounds. Furthermore, we causally tested this association in a second experiment, where we modulated STN via DBS across two sessions of the task, spaced at least one week apart (N=21, no sample overlap with Experiment 1). The LFP recordings in Experiment 1 showed that reductions of the SSVEP after distracting sounds were preceded by sound-related γ-frequency (>60Hz) activity in the STN. Trial-to-trial modeling further showed that this STN activity statistically mediated the sounds' suppressive effect on the SSVEP. In Experiment 2, modulating STN activity via DBS significantly reduced these sound-related SSVEP reductions. This provides causal evidence for the role of the STN in the surprise-related inhibition of attention. These findings suggest that the human STN contributes to the inhibition of attention, a non-motor process. This supports a domain-general view of the inhibitory role of the STN. Furthermore, these findings also suggest a potential mechanism underlying some of the known cognitive side-effects of STN-DBS treatment, especially on attentional processes. Finally, our newly-established outpatient LFP recording technique facilitates the testing of the role of subcortical nuclei in complex cognitive tasks, alongside recordings from the rest of the brain, and in much shorter time than perisurgical recordings.

Lingering Neural Representations of Past Task Features Adversely Affect Future Behavior.

During goal-directed behavior, humans purportedly form and retrieve so-called event files, conjunctive representations that link context-specific information about stimuli, their associated actions, and the expected action outcomes. The automatic formation, and later retrieval, of such conjunctive representations can substantially facilitate efficient action selection. However, recent behavioral work suggests that these event files may also adversely affect future behavior, especially when action requirements have changed between successive instances of the same task context (e.g., during task switching). Here, we directly tested this hypothesis with a recently developed method for measuring the strength of the neural representations of context-specific stimulus-action conjunctions (i.e., event files). Thirty-five male and female adult humans performed a task switching paradigm while undergoing EEG recordings. Replicating previous behavioral work, we found that changes in action requirements between two spaced repetitions of the same task incurred a significant reaction time cost. By combining multivariate pattern analysis and representational similarity analysis of the EEG recordings with linear mixed-effects modeling of trial-to-trial behavior, we then found that the magnitude of this behavioral cost was directly proportional to the strength of the conjunctive representation formed during the most recent previous exposure to the same task, that is, the most recent event file. This confirms that the formation of conjunctive representations of specific task contexts, stimuli, and actions in the brain can indeed adversely affect future behavior. Moreover, these findings demonstrate the potential of neural decoding of complex task set representations toward the prediction of behavior beyond the current trial.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Understanding how the human brain organizes individual components of complex tasks is paramount for understanding higher-order cognition. During complex tasks, the brain forms conjunctive representations that link individual task features (contexts, stimuli, actions), which aids future performance of the same task. However, this can have adverse effects when the required sequence of actions within a task changes. We decoded conjunctive representations from electroencephalographic recordings during a task that included frequent changes to the rules determining the response. Indeed, stronger initial conjunctive representations predicted significant future response-time costs when task contexts repeated with changed response requirements. Showing that the formation of conjunctive task representations can have negative future effects generates novel insights into complex behavior and cognition, including task switching, planning, and problem solving.

Early Action Error Processing Is Due to Domain-General Surprise, Whereas Later Processing Is Error Specific.

The ability to adapt behavior after erroneous actions is one of the key aspects of cognitive control. Error commission typically causes people to slow down their subsequent actions [post-error slowing (PES)]. Recent work has challenged the notion that PES reflects adaptive, controlled processing and instead suggests that it is a side effect of the surprising nature of errors. Indeed, human neuroimaging suggests that the brain networks involved in processing errors overlap with those processing error-unrelated surprise, calling into question whether there is a specific system for error processing in the brain at all. In the current study, we used EEG decoding and a novel behavioral paradigm to test whether there are indeed unique, error-specific processes that contribute to PES beyond domain-general surprise. Across two experiments in male and female humans (N = 76), we found that both errors and error-unrelated surprise were followed by slower responses when response-stimulus intervals were short. Furthermore, the early neural processes following error-specific and domain-general surprise showed significant cross-decoding. However, at longer intervals, which provided additional processing time, only errors were still followed by post-trial slowing. Furthermore, this error-specific PES effect was reflected in sustained neural activity that could be decoded from that associated with domain-general surprise, with the strongest contributions found at lateral frontal, occipital, and sensorimotor scalp sites. These findings suggest that errors and surprise initially share common processes, but that after additional processing time, unique, genuinely error-specific processes take over and contribute to behavioral adaptation.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Humans typically slow their actions after errors (PES). Some suggest that PES is a side effect of the unexpected, surprising nature of errors, challenging the notion of a genuine error processing system in the human brain. Here, we used multivariate EEG decoding to identify behavioral and neural processes uniquely related to error processing. Action slowing occurred following both action errors and error-unrelated surprise when time to prepare the next response was short. However, when there was more time to react, only errors were followed by slowing, further reflected in sustained neural activity. This suggests that errors and surprise initially share common processing, but that after additional time, error-specific, adaptive processes take over.

Two types of motor inhibition after action errors in humans.

Adaptive behavior requires the ability to appropriately react to action errors. Post-error slowing of response times (PES) is one of the most reliable phenomena in human behavior. It has been proposed that PES is partially achieved through inhibition of the motor system. However, there is no direct evidence for this link - or indeed, that the motor system is physiologically inhibited after errors altogether. Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation and electromyography to measure cortico-spinal excitability (CSE) across four experiments using a Simon task, in which female and male human participants sometimes committed errors. Errors were followed by reduced CSE at two different time points and in two different modes. Shortly after error commission (250ms) CSE was broadly suppressed - i.e., even task-unrelated motor effectors were inhibited. During the preparation of the subsequent response, CSE was specifically reduced at task-relevant effectors only. This latter effect was directly related to PES, with stronger CSE suppression accompanying greater PES. This suggests that PES is achieved through increased inhibitory control during post-error responses. To provide converging evidence, we then re-analyzed an openly-available EEG dataset that contained both Simon- and Stop-signal tasks using independent component analysis. We found that the same neural source component that indexed action-cancellation in the stop-signal task also showed clear PES-related activity during post-error responses in the Simon task. Together, these findings provide evidence that post-error adaptation is partially achieved through motor inhibition. Moreover, inhibition is engaged in two modes (first non-selective, then selective), aligning with recent multi-stage theories of error processing.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTIt is a common observation that humans implement a higher degree of caution when repeating an action during which they just committed a mistake. In the laboratory, such increased 'caution' is reflected in post-error slowing of response latencies. Many competing theories exist regarding the precise neural mechanisms underlying post-error slowing. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we show that after error commission, the human cortico-motor system is momentarily inhibited, both immediately after an error and during the preparation of the next action. Moreover, motor inhibition during the latter time period is directly predictive of post-error slowing. This shows that inhibitory control is a key mechanism humans engage to regulate their own behavior in the aftermath of error commission.

ß-Bursts over Frontal Cortex Track the Surprise of Unexpected Events in Auditory, Visual, and Tactile Modalities.

One of the fundamental ways in which the brain regulates and monitors behavior is by making predictions about the sensory environment and adjusting behavior when those expectations are violated. As such, surprise is one of the fundamental computations performed by the human brain. In recent years, it has been well established that one key aspect by which behavior is adjusted during surprise is inhibitory control of the motor system. Moreover, because surprise automatically triggers inhibitory control without much proactive influence, it can provide unique insights into largely reactive control processes. Recent years have seen tremendous interest in burst-like ß frequency events in the human (and nonhuman) local field potential-especially over (p)FC-as a potential signature of inhibitory control. To date, ß-bursts have only been studied in paradigms involving a substantial amount of proactive control (such as the stop-signal task). Here, we used two cross-modal oddball tasks to investigate whether surprise processing is accompanied by increases in scalp-recorded ß-bursts. Indeed, we found that unexpected events in all tested sensory domains (haptic, auditory, visual) were followed by low-latency increases in ß-bursting over frontal cortex. Across experiments, ß-burst rates were positively correlated with estimates of surprise derived from Shannon's information theory, a type of surprise that represents the degree to which a given stimulus violates prior expectations. As such, the current work clearly implicates frontal ß-bursts as a signature of surprise processing. We discuss these findings in the context of common frameworks of inhibitory and cognitive control after unexpected events.

Evoked mid-frontal activity predicts cognitive dysfunction in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction is a major feature of Parkinson's disease (PD), but the pathophysiology remains unknown. One potential mechanism is abnormal low-frequency cortical rhythms which engage cognitive functions and are deficient in PD. We tested the hypothesis that mid-frontal delta/theta rhythms predict cognitive dysfunction in PD. METHOD: We recruited 100 patients with PD and 49 demographically similar control participants who completed a series of cognitive control tasks, including the Simon, oddball and interval-timing tasks. We focused on cue-evoked delta (1-4 Hz) and theta (4-7 Hz) rhythms from a single mid-frontal EEG electrode (cranial vertex (Cz)) in patients with PD who were either cognitively normal, with mild-cognitive impairments (Parkinson's disease with mild-cognitive impairment) or had dementia (Parkinson's disease dementia). RESULTS: We found that PD-related cognitive dysfunction was associated with increased response latencies and decreased mid-frontal delta power across all tasks. Within patients with PD, the first principal component of evoked electroencephalography features from a single electrode (Cz) strongly correlated with clinical metrics such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (r=0.34) and with National Institutes of Health Toolbox Executive Function score (r=0.46). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that cue-evoked mid-frontal delta/theta rhythms directly relate to cognition in PD. Our results provide insight into the nature of low-frequency frontal rhythms and suggest that PD-related cognitive dysfunction results from decreased delta/theta activity. These findings could facilitate the development of new biomarkers and targeted therapies for cognitive symptoms of PD.

Novelty-induced frontal-STN networks in Parkinson's disease.

Novelty detection is a primitive subcomponent of cognitive control that can be deficient in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. Here, we studied the corticostriatal mechanisms underlying novelty-response deficits. In participants with PD, we recorded from cortical circuits with scalp-based electroencephalography (EEG) and from subcortical circuits using intraoperative neurophysiology during surgeries for implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes. We report three major results. First, novel auditory stimuli triggered midfrontal low-frequency rhythms; of these, 1-4 Hz "delta" rhythms were linked to novelty-associated slowing, whereas 4-7 Hz "theta" rhythms were specifically attenuated in PD. Second, 32% of subthalamic nucleus (STN) neurons were response-modulated; nearly all (94%) of these were also modulated by novel stimuli. Third, response-modulated STN neurons were coherent with midfrontal 1-4 Hz activity. These findings link scalp-based measurements of neural activity with neuronal activity in the STN. Our results provide insight into midfrontal cognitive control mechanisms and how purported hyperdirect frontobasal ganglia circuits evaluate new information.

Measuring the nonselective effects of motor inhibition using isometric force recordings.

Inhibition is a key cognitive control mechanism humans use to enable goal-directed behavior. When rapidly exerted, inhibitory control has broad, nonselective motor effects, typically demonstrated using corticospinal excitability measurements (CSE) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). For example, during rapid action-stopping, CSE is suppressed at both stopped and task-unrelated muscles. While such TMS-based CSE measurements have provided crucial insights into the fronto-basal ganglia circuitry underlying inhibitory control, they have several downsides. TMS is contraindicated in many populations (e.g., epilepsy or deep-brain stimulation patients), has limited temporal resolution, produces distracting auditory and haptic stimulation, is difficult to combine with other imaging methods, and necessitates expensive, immobile equipment. Here, we attempted to measure the nonselective motor effects of inhibitory control using a method unaffected by these shortcomings. Thirty male and female human participants exerted isometric force on a high-precision handheld force transducer while performing a foot-response stop-signal task. Indeed, when foot movements were successfully stopped, force output at the task-irrelevant hand was suppressed as well. Moreover, this nonselective reduction of isometric force was highly correlated with stop-signal performance and showed frequency dynamics similar to established inhibitory signatures typically found in neural and muscle recordings. Together, these findings demonstrate that isometric force recordings can reliably capture the nonselective effects of motor inhibition, opening the door to many applications that are hard or impossible to realize with TMS.

Common and Unique Inhibitory Control Signatures of Action-Stopping and Attentional Capture Suggest That Actions Are Stopped in Two Stages.

The ability to stop an already initiated action is paramount to adaptive behavior. Much scientific debate in the field of human action-stopping currently focuses on two interrelated questions. (1) Which cognitive and neural processes uniquely underpin the implementation of inhibitory control when actions are stopped after explicit stop signals, and which processes are instead commonly evoked by all salient signals, even those that do not require stopping? (2) Why do purported (neuro)physiological signatures of inhibition occur at two different latencies after stop signals? Here, we address both questions via two preregistered experiments that combined measurements of corticospinal excitability, EMG, and whole-scalp EEG. Adult human subjects performed a stop signal task that also contained "ignore" signals: equally salient signals that did not require stopping but rather completion of the Go response. We found that both stop- and ignore signals produced equal amounts of early-latency inhibition of corticospinal excitability and EMG, which took place ∼150 ms following either signal. Multivariate pattern analysis of the whole-scalp EEG data further corroborated that this early processing stage was shared between stop- and ignore signals, as neural activity following the two signals could not be decoded from each other until a later time period. In this later period, unique activity related to stop signals emerged at frontocentral scalp sites, reflecting an increased stop signal P3. These findings suggest a two-step model of action-stopping, according to which an initial, universal inhibitory response to the saliency of the stop signal is followed by a slower process that is unique to outright stopping.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Humans often have to stop their ongoing actions when indicated by environmental stimuli (stop signals). Successful action-stopping requires both the ability to detect these salient stop signals and to subsequently inhibit ongoing motor programs. Because of this tight entanglement of attentional control and motor inhibition, identifying unique neurophysiological signatures of action-stopping is difficult. Indeed, we report that recently proposed early-latency signatures of motor inhibition during action-stopping are also found after salient signals that do not require stopping. However, using multivariate pattern analysis of scalp-recorded neural data, we also identified subsequent neural activity that uniquely distinguished action-stopping from saliency detection. These results suggest that actions are stopped in two stages: the first common to all salient events and the second unique to action-stopping.

Unexpected Sounds Nonselectively Inhibit Active Visual Stimulus Representations.

The brain's capacity to process unexpected events is key to cognitive flexibility. The most well-known effect of unexpected events is the interruption of attentional engagement (distraction). We tested whether unexpected events interrupt attentional representations by activating a neural mechanism for inhibitory control. This mechanism is most well characterized within the motor system. However, recent work showed that it is automatically activated by unexpected events and can explain some of their nonmotor effects (e.g., on working memory representations). Here, human participants attended to lateralized flickering visual stimuli, producing steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs) in the scalp electroencephalogram. After unexpected sounds, the SSVEP was rapidly suppressed. Using a functional localizer (stop-signal) task and independent component analysis, we then identified a fronto-central EEG source whose activity indexes inhibitory motor control. Unexpected sounds in the SSVEP task also activated this source. Using single-trial analyses, we found that subcomponents of this source differentially relate to sound-induced SSVEP changes: While its N2 component predicted the subsequent suppression of the attended-stimulus SSVEP, the P3 component predicted the suppression of the SSVEP to the unattended stimulus. These results shed new light on the processes underlying fronto-central control signals and have implications for phenomena such as distraction and the attentional blink.

ß-Bursts Reveal the Trial-to-Trial Dynamics of Movement Initiation and Cancellation.

The neurophysiological basis of motor control is of substantial interest to basic researchers and clinicians alike. Motor processes are accompanied by prominent field potential changes in the ß-frequency band (15-29 Hz): in trial-averages, movement initiation is accompanied by ß-band desynchronization over sensorimotor areas, whereas movement cancellation is accompanied by ß-power increases over (pre)frontal areas. However, averaging misrepresents the true nature of the ß-signal. Unaveraged ß-band activity is characterized by short-lasting, burst-like events, rather than by steady modulations. Therefore, averaging-based quantifications may miss important brain-behavior relationships. To investigate how ß-bursts relate to movement in male and female humans (N = 234), we investigated scalp-recorded ß-band activity during the stop-signal task, which operationalizes both movement initiation and cancellation. Both processes were indexed by systematic spatiotemporal changes in ß-burst rates. Before movement initiation, ß-bursting was prominent at bilateral sensorimotor sites. These burst-rates predicted reaction time (a relationship that was absent in trial-average data), suggesting that sensorimotor ß-bursting signifies an inhibited motor system, which has to be overcome to initiate movements. Indeed, during movement initiation, sensorimotor burst-rates steadily decreased, lateralizing just before movement execution. In contrast, successful movement cancellation was signified by increased phasic ß-bursting over fronto-central sites. Such ß-bursts were followed by short-latency increases of bilateral sensorimotor ß-burst rates, suggesting that motor inhibition can be rapidly re-instantiated by frontal areas when movements have to be rapidly cancelled. Together, these findings suggest that ß-bursting is a fundamental signature of the motor system, used by both sensorimotor and frontal areas involved in the trial-by-trial control of behavior.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Movement-related ß-frequency (15-29 Hz) changes are among the most prominent features of neural recordings across species, scales, and methods. However, standard averaging-based methods obscure the true dynamics of ß-band activity, which is dominated by short-lived, burst-like events. Here, we demonstrate that both movement-initiation and cancellation in humans are characterized by unique trial-to-trial patterns of ß-bursting. Movement initiation is characterized by steady reductions of ß-bursting over bilateral sensorimotor sites. In contrast, during rapid movement cancellation, ß-bursts first emerge over fronto-central sites typically associated with motor control, after which sensorimotor ß-bursting re-initiates. These findings suggest a fundamentally novel, non-invasive measure of the neural interaction underlying movement-initiation and -cancellation, opening new avenues for the study of motor control in health and disease.

Adjustments to Proactive Motor Inhibition without Effector-Specific Foreknowledge Are Reflected in a Bilateral Upregulation of Sensorimotor ß-Burst Rates.

Classic work using the stop-signal task has shown that humans can use inhibitory control to cancel already initiated movements. Subsequent work revealed that inhibitory control can be proactively recruited in anticipation of a potential stop-signal, thereby increasing the likelihood of successful movement cancellation. However, the exact neurophysiological effects of proactive inhibitory control on the motor system are still unclear. On the basis of classic views of sensorimotor ß-band activity, as well as recent findings demonstrating the burst-like nature of this signal, we recently proposed that proactive inhibitory control is implemented by influencing the rate of sensorimotor ß-bursts during movement initiation. Here, we directly tested this hypothesis using scalp EEG recordings of ß-band activity in 41 healthy human adults during a bimanual RT task. By comparing motor responses made in two different contexts-during blocks with or without stop-signals-we found that premovement ß-burst rates over both contralateral and ipsilateral sensorimotor areas were increased in stop-signal blocks compared to pure-go blocks. Moreover, the degree of this burst rate difference indexed the behavioral implementation of proactive inhibition (i.e., the degree of anticipatory response slowing in the stop-signal blocks). Finally, exploratory analyses showed that these condition differences were explained by a significant increase in ß bursting that was already present during baseline period before the movement initiation signal. Together, this suggests that the strategic deployment of proactive inhibitory motor control is implemented by upregulating the tonic inhibition of the motor system, signified by increased sensorimotor ß-bursting both before and after signals to initiate a movement.

Paired-pulse TMS and scalp EEG reveal systematic relationship between inhibitory GABAa signaling in M1 and fronto-central cortical activity during action stopping.

By stopping actions even after their initiation, humans can flexibly adapt ongoing behavior to changing circumstances. The neural processes underlying the inhibition of movement during action stopping are still controversial. In the 90s, a fronto-central event-related potential (ERP) was discovered in the human EEG response to stop signals in the classic stop-signal task, alongside a proposal that this "stop-signal P3" reflects an inhibitory process. Indeed, both amplitude and onset of the stop-signal P3 relate to overt behavior and movement-related EEG activity in ways predicted by the dominant models of action-stopping. However, neither EEG nor behavior allow direct inferences about the presence or absence of neurophysiological inhibition of the motor cortex, making it impossible to definitively relate the stop-signal P3 to inhibition. Here, we therefore present a multimethod investigation of the relationship between the stop-signal P3 and GABAergic signaling in primary motor cortex, as indexed by paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). In detail, we measured short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), a marker of inhibitory GABAa activity in M1, in a group of 41 human participants who also performed the stop-signal task while undergoing EEG recordings. In line with the P3-inhibition hypothesis, we found that subjects with stronger inhibitory GABA activity in M1 also showed both faster onsets and larger amplitudes of the stop-signal P3. This provides direct evidence linking the properties of this ERP to a true physiological index of motor system inhibition. We discuss these findings in the context of recent theoretical developments and empirical findings regarding the neural implementation of motor inhibition.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The neural mechanisms underlying rapid action stopping in humans are subject to intense debate, in part because recordings of neural signals purportedly reflecting inhibitory motor control are hard to directly relate to the true, physiological inhibition of motor cortex. For the first time, the current study combines EEG and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) methods to demonstrate a direct correspondence between fronto-central control-related EEG activity following signals to cancel an action and the physiological inhibition of primary motor cortex.

Leveling the Field for a Fairer Race between Going and Stopping: Neural Evidence for the Race Model of Motor Inhibition from a New Version of the Stop Signal Task.

The stop signal task (SST) is the gold standard experimental model of inhibitory control. However, neither SST condition-contrast (stop vs. go, successful vs. failed stop) purely operationalizes inhibition. Because stop trials include a second, infrequent signal, the stop versus go contrast confounds inhibition with attentional and stimulus processing demands. While this confound is controlled for in the successful versus failed stop contrast, the go process is systematically faster on failed stop trials, contaminating the contrast with a different noninhibitory confound. Here, we present an SST variant to address both confounds and evaluate putative neural indices of inhibition with these influences removed. In our variant, stop signals occurred on every trial, equating the noninhibitory demands of the stop versus go contrast. To entice participants to respond despite the impending stop signals, responses produced before stop signals were rewarded. This also reversed the go process bias that typically affects the successful versus failed stop contrast. We recorded scalp electroencephalography in this new version of the task (as well as a standard version of the SST with infrequent stop signal) and found that, even under these conditions, the properties of the frontocentral stop signal P3 ERP remained consistent with the race model. Specifically, in both tasks, the amplitude of the P3 was increased on stop versus go trials. Moreover, the onset of this P3 occurred earlier for successful compared with failed stop trials in both tasks, consistent with the proposal of the race model that an earlier start of the inhibition process will increase stopping success. Therefore, the frontocentral stop signal P3 represents a neural process whose properties are in line with the predictions of the race model of motor inhibition, even when the SST's confounds are controlled.

Frontal cortex tracks surprise separately for different sensory modalities but engages a common inhibitory control mechanism.

The brain constantly generates predictions about the environment to guide action. Unexpected events lead to surprise and can necessitate the modification of ongoing behavior. Surprise can occur for any sensory domain, but it is not clear how these separate surprise signals are integrated to affect motor output. By applying a trial-to-trial Bayesian surprise model to human electroencephalography data recorded during a cross-modal oddball task, we tested whether there are separate predictive models for different sensory modalities (visual, auditory), or whether expectations are integrated across modalities such that surprise in one modality decreases surprise for a subsequent unexpected event in the other modality. We found that while surprise was represented in a common frontal signature across sensory modalities (the fronto-central P3 event-related potential), the single-trial amplitudes of this signature more closely conformed to a model with separate surprise terms for each sensory domain. We then investigated whether surprise-related fronto-central P3 activity indexes the rapid inhibitory control of ongoing behavior after surprise, as suggested by recent theories. Confirming this prediction, the fronto-central P3 amplitude after both auditory and visual unexpected events was highly correlated with the fronto-central P3 found after stop-signals (measured in a separate stop-signal task). Moreover, surprise-related and stopping-related activity loaded onto the same component in a cross-task independent components analysis. Together, these findings suggest that medial frontal cortex maintains separate predictive models for different sensory domains, but engages a common mechanism for inhibitory control of behavior regardless of the source of surprise.

Non-selective inhibition of the motor system following unexpected and expected infrequent events.

Motor inhibition is a key control mechanism that allows humans to rapidly adapt their actions in response to environmental events. One of the hallmark signatures of rapidly exerted, reactive motor inhibition is the non-selective suppression of cortico-spinal excitability (CSE): unexpected sensory stimuli lead to a suppression of CSE across the entire motor system, even in muscles that are inactive. Theories suggest that this reflects a fast, automatic, and broad engagement of inhibitory control, which facilitates behavioral adaptations to unexpected changes in the sensory environment. However, it is an open question whether such non-selective CSE suppression is truly due to the unexpected nature of the sensory event, or whether it is sufficient for an event to be merely infrequent (but not unexpected). Here, we report data from two experiments in which human subjects experienced both unexpected and expected infrequent events during a two-alternative forced-choice reaction time task while CSE was measured from a task-unrelated muscle. We found that expected infrequent events can indeed produce non-selective CSE suppression-but only when they occur during movement initiation. In contrast, unexpected infrequent events produce non-selective CSE suppression relative to frequent, expected events even in the absence of movement initiation. Moreover, CSE suppression due to unexpected events occurs at shorter latencies compared to expected infrequent events. These findings demonstrate that unexpectedness and stimulus infrequency have qualitatively different suppressive effects on the motor system. They also have key implications for studies that seek to disentangle neural and psychological processes related to motor inhibition and stimulus detection.

Perceptual Surprise Improves Action Stopping by Nonselectively Suppressing Motor Activity via a Neural Mechanism for Motor Inhibition.

Motor inhibition is a cognitive control ability that allows humans to stop actions rapidly even after initiation. Understanding and improving motor inhibition could benefit adaptive behavior in both health and disease. We recently found that presenting surprising, task-unrelated sounds when stopping is necessary improves the likelihood of successful stopping. In the current study, we investigated the neural underpinnings of this effect. Specifically, we tested whether surprise-related stopping improvements are due to a genuine increase in motor inhibition. In Experiment 1, we measured motor inhibition in primary motor cortex of male and female humans by quantifying corticospinal excitability (CSE) via transcranial magnetic stimulation and electromyography during a hybrid surprise-Go/NoGo task. Consistent with prior studies of motor inhibition, successful stopping was accompanied by nonselective suppression of CSE; that is, CSE was suppressed even in task-unrelated motor effectors. Importantly, unexpected sounds significantly increased this motor-system inhibition to a degree that was directly related to behavioral improvements in stopping. In Experiment 2, we then used scalp encephalography to investigate whether unexpected sounds increase motor-inhibition-related activity in the CNS. We used an independent stop-signal localizer task to identify a well characterized frontocentral low-frequency EEG component that indexes motor inhibition. We then investigated the activity of this component in the surprise-Go/NoGo task. Consistent with Experiment 1, this signature of motor inhibition was indeed increased when NoGo signals were followed by unexpected sounds. Together, these experiments provide converging evidence suggesting that unexpected events improve motor inhibition by automatically triggering inhibitory control.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The ability to stop ongoing actions rapidly allows humans to adapt their behavior flexibly and rapidly. Action stopping is important in daily life (e.g., stopping to cross the street when a car approaches) and is severely impaired in many neuropsychiatric disorders. Therefore, finding ways to improve action stopping could aid adaptive behaviors in health and disease. Our current study shows that presenting unexpected sounds in stopping situations facilitates successful stopping. This improvement is specifically due to a surprise-related increase in a neural mechanism for motor inhibition, which rapidly suppresses the excitability of the motor system after unexpected events. These findings suggest a tight interaction between the neural systems for surprise processing and motor inhibition and yield a promising avenue for future research.

A human prefrontal-subthalamic circuit for cognitive control.

The subthalamic nucleus is a key site controlling motor function in humans. Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus can improve movements in patients with Parkinson's disease; however, for unclear reasons, it can also have cognitive effects. Here, we show that the human subthalamic nucleus is monosynaptically connected with cognitive brain areas such as the prefrontal cortex. Single neurons and field potentials in the subthalamic nucleus are modulated during cognitive processing and are coherent with 4-Hz oscillations in medial prefrontal cortex. These data predict that low-frequency deep brain stimulation may alleviate cognitive deficits in Parkinson's disease patients. In line with this idea, we found that novel 4-Hz deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus improved cognitive performance. These data support a role for the human hyperdirect pathway in cognitive control, which could have relevance for brain-stimulation therapies aimed at cognitive symptoms of human brain disease.awx300media15660002226001.

A Neural Mechanism for Surprise-related Interruptions of Visuospatial Working Memory.

Surprising perceptual events recruit a fronto-basal ganglia mechanism for inhibition, which suppresses motor activity following surprise. A recent study found that this inhibitory mechanism also disrupts the maintenance of verbal working memory (WM) after surprising tones. However, it is unclear whether this same mechanism also relates to surprise-related interruptions of non-verbal WM. We tested this hypothesis using a change-detection task, in which surprising tones impaired visuospatial WM. Participants also performed a stop-signal task (SST). We used independent component analysis and single-trial scalp-electroencephalogram to test whether the same inhibitory mechanism that reflects motor inhibition in the SST relates to surprise-related visuospatial WM decrements, as was the case for verbal WM. As expected, surprising tones elicited activity of the inhibitory mechanism, and this activity correlated strongly with the trial-by-trial level of surprise. However, unlike for verbal WM, the activity of this mechanism was unrelated to visuospatial WM accuracy. Instead, inhibition-independent activity that immediately succeeded the inhibitory mechanism was increased when visuospatial WM was disrupted. This shows that surprise-related interruptions of visuospatial WM are not effected by the same inhibitory mechanism that interrupts verbal WM, and instead provides evidence for a 2-stage model of distraction.