Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.

The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate--in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which we...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Christopher H Chatham, Eric D Claus, Albert Kim, Tim Curran, Marie T Banich, Yuko Munakata
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/40b520033ad34856ade1a2ac4309f5f5
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:40b520033ad34856ade1a2ac4309f5f5
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:40b520033ad34856ade1a2ac4309f5f52021-11-18T07:26:44ZCognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0031546https://doaj.org/article/40b520033ad34856ade1a2ac4309f5f52012-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/22384038/pdf/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate--in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which we refer to as context-monitoring. Using behavioral, neuroimaging, electrophysiological and computational approaches, we tested whether motoric stopping per se is the cognitively-controlled process supporting response inhibition, or whether context-monitoring may fill this role. Our results demonstrate that inhibition does not require control mechanisms beyond those involved in context-monitoring, and that such control mechanisms are the same regardless of stopping demands. These results challenge dominant accounts of inhibitory control, which posit that motoric stopping is the cognitively-controlled process of response inhibition, and clarify emerging debates on the frontal substrates of response inhibition by replacing the centrality of controlled mechanisms for motoric stopping with context-monitoring.Christopher H ChathamEric D ClausAlbert KimTim CurranMarie T BanichYuko MunakataPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 7, Iss 2, p e31546 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Christopher H Chatham Eric D Claus Albert Kim Tim Curran Marie T Banich Yuko Munakata Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
description	The inhibition of unwanted behaviors is considered an effortful and controlled ability. However, inhibition also requires the detection of contexts indicating that old behaviors may be inappropriate--in other words, inhibition requires the ability to monitor context in the service of goals, which we refer to as context-monitoring. Using behavioral, neuroimaging, electrophysiological and computational approaches, we tested whether motoric stopping per se is the cognitively-controlled process supporting response inhibition, or whether context-monitoring may fill this role. Our results demonstrate that inhibition does not require control mechanisms beyond those involved in context-monitoring, and that such control mechanisms are the same regardless of stopping demands. These results challenge dominant accounts of inhibitory control, which posit that motoric stopping is the cognitively-controlled process of response inhibition, and clarify emerging debates on the frontal substrates of response inhibition by replacing the centrality of controlled mechanisms for motoric stopping with context-monitoring.
format	article
author	Christopher H Chatham Eric D Claus Albert Kim Tim Curran Marie T Banich Yuko Munakata
author_facet	Christopher H Chatham Eric D Claus Albert Kim Tim Curran Marie T Banich Yuko Munakata
author_sort	Christopher H Chatham
title	Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
title_short	Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
title_full	Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
title_fullStr	Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
title_full_unstemmed	Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
title_sort	cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/40b520033ad34856ade1a2ac4309f5f5
work_keys_str_mv	AT christopherhchatham cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition AT ericdclaus cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition AT albertkim cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition AT timcurran cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition AT marietbanich cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition AT yukomunakata cognitivecontrolreflectscontextmonitoringnotmotoricstoppinginresponseinhibition
_version_	1718423404024954880

Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition.

Ejemplares similares