Compromised reactive but intact proactive inhibitory motor control in Tourette disorder.

Tourette disorder (TD) is characterized by tics, which are sudden repetitive involuntary movements or vocalizations. Deficits in inhibitory control in TD patients remain inconclusive from the traditional method of estimating the ability to stop an impending action, which requires careful interpretation of a metric derived from race model. One possible explanation for these inconsistencies is that race model's assumptions of independent and stochastic rise of GO and STOP process to a fixed threshold are often violated, making the classical metric to assess inhibitory control less robust. Here, we used a pair of metrics derived from a recent alternative model to address why stopping performance in TD is unaffected despite atypical neural circuitry. These new metrics distinguish between proactive and reactive inhibitory control and estimate them separately. When these metrics in adult TD group were contrasted with healthy controls (HC), we identified robust deficits in reactive control, but not in proactive control in TD. The TD group exhibited difficulty in slowing down the speed of movement preparation, which they rectified by their intact ability to postpone the movement.

Efficacy of inhibitory control depends on procrastination and deceleration in saccade planning.

A goal-directed flexible behavior warrants our ability to timely inhibit impending movements deemed inappropriate due to an abrupt change in the context. Race model of countermanding rapid saccadic eye movement posits a competition between a preparatory GO process and an inhibitory STOP process rising to reach a fixed threshold. Stop-signal response time (SSRT), which is the average time STOP takes to rise to the threshold, is widely used as a metric to assess the ability to revoke a movement. A reliable estimation of SSRT critically depends on the assumption of independence between GO and STOP process, which has been violated in many studies. In addition, the physiological correlate of stochastic rise of STOP process to a threshold remains unsubstantiated thus far. Here, we introduce a method to estimate the efficacy of inhibitory control on the premise of an alternative model that assumes deceleration of GO process following the stop-signal onset. The average reaction time increased exponentially with the increase in the maximum duration available to attenuate GO process by the stop-signal. Our method estimates saccade procrastination in anticipation of the stop-signal, and the rate of increase in attenuation on GO process. Unlike SSRT, these new metrics are independent of how the stopping performance varies with the delay between go- and stop-signal onsets. We reckon that these metrics together qualify to be considered as an efficient alternative to SSRT for the estimation of individuals' ability to countermand saccades, especially in cases when the assumptions of race model are no longer valid.

Detectability of stop-signal determines magnitude of deceleration in saccade planning.

An inhibitory control is exerted when the context in which a movement has been planned changes abruptly making the impending movement inappropriate. Neurons in the frontal eye field and superior colliculus steadily increase activity before a saccadic eye movement, but cease the rise below a threshold when an impending saccade is withheld in response to an unexpected stop-signal. This type of neural modulation has been majorly considered as an outcome of a race between preparatory and inhibitory processes ramping up to reach a decision criterion. An alternative model claims that the rate of saccade planning is diminished exclusively when the stop-signal is detected within a stipulated period. However, due to a dearth of empirical evidence in support of the latter model, it remains unclear how the detectability of the stop-signal influences saccade inhibition. In our study, human participants selected a visual target to look at by discriminating a go-cue. Infrequently they cancelled saccade and reported whether they saw the stop-signal. The go-cue and stop-signal both were embedded in a stream of irrelevant stimuli presented in rapid succession. Participants exhibited difficulty in detection of the stop-signal when presented almost immediately after the go-cue. We found a robust relationship between the detectability of the stop-signal and the odds of saccade inhibition. Saccade latency increased exponentially with the maximum time available for processing the stop-signal before gaze shifted. A model in which the stop-signal onset spontaneously decelerated progressive saccade planning with the magnitude proportional to its detectability accounted for the data.