title: Comparison of Motor Inhibition in Variants of the Instructed-Delay Choice Reaction Time Task.
abstract: Using instructed-delay choice reaction time (RT) paradigms, many previous studies have shown that the motor system is transiently inhibited during response preparation: motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex are typically suppressed during the delay period. This effect has been observed in both selected and non-selected effectors, although MEP changes in selected effectors have been more inconsistent across task versions. Here, we compared changes in MEP amplitudes in three different variants of an instructed-delay choice RT task. All variants required participants to choose between left and right index finger movements but the responses were either provided "in the air" (Variant 1), on a regular keyboard (Variant 2), or on a response device designed to control from premature responses (Variant 3). The task variants also differed according to the visual layout (more concrete in Variant 3) and depending on whether participants received a feedback of their performance (absent in Variant 1). Behavior was globally comparable between the three variants of the task although the propensity to respond prematurely was highest in Variant 2 and lowest in Variant 3. MEPs elicited in a non-selected hand were similarly suppressed in the three variants of the task. However, significant differences emerged when considering MEPs elicited in the selected hand: these MEPs were suppressed in Variants 1 and 3 whereas they were often facilitated in Variant 2, especially in the right dominant hand. In conclusion, MEPs elicited in selected muscles seem to be more sensitive to small variations to the task design than those recorded in non-selected effectors, probably because they reflect a complex combination of inhibitory and facilitatory influences on the motor output system. Finally, the use of a standard keyboard seems to be particularly inappropriate because it encourages participants to respond promptly with no means to control for premature responses, probably increasing the relative amount of facilitatory influences at the time motor inhibition is probed.
authors: Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
authors: Caroline
authors: C
authors: Quoilin
authors: Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
authors: Julien
authors: J
authors: Lambert
authors: Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
authors: Benvenuto
authors: B
authors: Jacob
authors: Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
authors: Pierre-Alexandre
authors: PA
authors: Klein
authors: Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
authors: Julie
authors: J
authors: Duque
mesh_terms: D019054:Evoked Potentials, Motor; D005260:Female; D005385:Fingers / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009044:Motor Cortex / Q000502:physiology*; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology*; D050781:Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D055815:Young Adult