Enhanced intentional inhibition with increased subliminal action preparation

Abstract

Intentional inhibition, the ability to voluntarily inhibit or suspend an action preparation, is closely related to self-control. It is widely believed that subliminal stimuli can also activate action preparation, but whether intentional inhibition is enhanced or disrupted with greater subliminal action preparation remains unclear. In this study, participants voluntarily decided whether or not to perform the action in the scenario with subliminal action preparation, and the strength of the action preparation was manipulated by a precueing procedure. The results, based on behavioural measures and drift-diffusion models, showed that intentional inhibition enhanced with increasing subliminal action preparation, suggesting that as subliminal action preparation increases, people are more inclined to make inhibitory decisions. This study provides evidence for a framework in which strong subliminal action preparation induces enhanced cognitive monitoring.

Keywords

Intentional inhibition subliminal preparation decision-making free choices drift-diffusion model

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brass

Haggard

(2007). To do or not to do: The neural signature of self-control. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(34), 9141–9145. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0924-07.2007

Brass

Haggard

(2008). The what, when, whether model of intentional action. The Neuroscientist, 14, 319–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858408317417

Brass

Lynn

M. T.

Demanet

Rigoni

(2013). Imaging volition: What the brain can tell us about the will. Experimental Brain Research, 229, 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3472-x

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155

Dall’Acqua

Begliomini

Motta

Miotto

Castiello

(2018). Effects of intentionality and subliminal information in free-choices to inhibit. Neuropsychologia, 109, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.11.035

Eimer

Schlaghecken

(1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737–1747. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.6.1737

Eimer

Schlaghecken

(2003). Response facilitation and inhibition in subliminal priming. Biological Psychology, 64, 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0511(03)00100-5

Faul

Erdfelder

Buchner

Lang

A. G.

(2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Filevich

Kühn

Haggard

(2012). Intentional inhibition in human action: The power of “no.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 36(4), 1107–1118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.01.006

10.

Gomez

Ratcliff

Perea

(2007). A model of the go/no-go task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 389–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.389

11.

Haggard

(2008). Human volition: Towards a neuroscience of will. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(12), 934–946. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2497

12.

Klapp

S. T.

(2015). One version of direct response priming requires automatization of the relevant associations but not awareness of the prime. Consciousness and Cognition, 34, 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.08.004

13.

Leuthold

Kopp

(1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related brain potentials. Psychological Science, 9, 263–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00053

14.

Lingnau

Vorberg

(2005). The time course of response inhibition in masked priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 67(3), 545–557. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193330

15.

Lleras

Enns

J. T.

(2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 133, 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.475

16.

Lynn

M. T.

Muhle-Karbe

P. S.

Brass

(2014). Controlling the self: The role of the dorsal frontomedian cortex in intentional inhibition. Neuropsychologia, 65, 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.09.009

17.

Meyer

K. N.

Davidow

J. Y.

Van Dijk

K. R. A.

Santillana

R. M.

Snyder

Bustamante

C. M. V.

. . .Sheridan

M. A.

(2021). History of conditioned reward association disrupts inhibitory control: An examination of neural correlates. NeuroImage, 227, 117629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117629

18.

Newell

B. R.

Shanks

D. R.

(2014). Unconscious influences on decision making: A critical review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12003214

19.

Parkinson

Garfinkel

Critchley

Dienes

Seth

A. K.

(2017). Don’t make me angry, you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry: Volitional choices to act or inhibit are modulated by subliminal perception of emotional faces. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 17, 252–268. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-016-0477-5

20.

Parkinson

Haggard

(2014). Subliminal priming of intentional inhibition. Cognition, 130(2), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.005

21.

Parkinson

Haggard

(2015). Choosing to stop: Responses evoked by externally triggered and internally generated inhibition identify a neural mechanism of will. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(10), 1948–1956. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00830

22.

Ratcliff

Huang-Pollock

McKoon

(2018). Modeling individual differences in the go/no-go task with a diffusion model. Decision, 5(1), 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000065

23.

Ratcliff

McKoon

(2008). The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation, 20(4), 873–922. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420

24.

Ratcliff

Van Dongen

H. P. A.

(2011). Diffusion model for one-choice reaction-time tasks and the cognitive effects of sleep deprivation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(27), 11285–11290. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100483108

25.

Schlaghecken

Eimer

(2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: Evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/0.3758/BF03194564

26.

Schlaghecken

Eimer

(2006). Active masks and active inhibition: A comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaskowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(3), 484–494. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.135.3.484

27.

Spiegelhalter

D. J.

Best

N. G.

Van Der Linde

C. A.

(2002). Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 64(4), 583–639. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9868.00353

28.

Sumner

Brandwood

(2008). Oscillations in Motor Priming Positive Rebound Follows the inhibitory phase in the masked prime paradigm. Journal of Motor Behavior, 240(6), 484–489. https://doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.40.6.484-490

29.

Sumner

Tsai

P. C.

Nachev

(2006). Attentional modulation of sensorimotor processes in the absence of perceptual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(27), 10520–10525. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0601974103

30.

van den Brink

R. L.

Murphy

P. R.

Desender

De Ru

Nieuwenhuis

. (2021). Temporal expectation hastens decision onset but does not affect evidence quality. Journal of Neuroscience, 41(1), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1103-20.2020

31.

van Gaal

S. V.

Ridderinkhof

K. R.

Scholte

H. S.

Lamme

V. A. F

. (2010). Unconscious activation of the prefrontal no-go network. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(11), 4143–4150. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2992-09.2010

32.

Vlassova

Donkin

Pearson

(2014). Unconscious information changes decision accuracy but not confidence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(45), 16214–16218. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1403619111

33.

Vorberg

Mattler

Heinecke

Schmidt

Schwarzbach

(2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, 6275–6280. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0931489100

34.

Wagenmakers

E. J.

(2009). Methodological and empirical developments for the Ratcliff diffusion model of response times and accuracy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(5), 641–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440802205067

35.

Wang

Zhao

Yao

Wang

(2020). Attentional modulation of unconscious inhibitory visuomotor processes: An EEG study. Psychophysiology, 57(8), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13561

36.

Wang

Liu

Yao

Wang

(2020). Why do you often stop your impulsive behavior at the last moment? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 27(2), 498–503. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01727-6

37.

Wang

Liu

Gong

Zhao

Chen

(2017). Response readiness modulates the development of association-based automaticity in masked priming. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 79(3), 820–832. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1275-4

38.

Wang

Yao

Wang

(2019). The internal temporal dynamic of unconscious inhibition related to weak stimulus–response associations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819878121

39.

Weidacker

Kvamme

T. L.

Whiteford

Valle Guzman

Voon

(2021). Incentives and voluntary stopping: The intentional hand task. Cognition, 206, 104504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104504

40.

Wiecki

T. V.

Sofer

Frank

M. J.

(2013). HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the Drift-Diffusion Model in Python. Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, 7(14), 984–1007. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2013.00014

41.

Zhang

Rittman

Nombela

Fois

Coyle-Gilchrist

Barker

R. A.

. . .Rowe

J. B.

(2016). Different decision deficits impair response inhibition in progressive supranuclear palsy and Parkinson’s disease. Brain, 139, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awv331

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.07 MB