A consensus guide to capturing the ability to inhibit actions and impulsive behaviors in the stop-signal task
- Ghent University, Belgium
- University of California, San Diego, United States
- Leiden University, Netherlands
- Technical University of Dresden, Germany
- Stanford University, United States
- University of Maryland, United States
- Indiana University, United States
- University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
- Cardiff University, United Kingdom
- Oldenburg University, Germany
- University of Western Ontario, Canada
- Monash University, Australia
- University of Toronto, Canada
- University of Vermont, United States
- University of Oregon, United States
- University of Tasmania, Australia
- University of Oslo, Norway
- Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Netherlands
- KU Leuven, Belgium
- Vanderbilt University, United States
- University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Anglia Ruskin University, United Kingdom
- Indian Institute of Science, India
- Yale University, United States
- Queen's University, Canada
- University of Maryland, College Park, United States
- King's College London, United Kingdom
- Dresden University of Technology, Germany
- Michigan State University, United States
- University of Iowa, United States
- Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
- Donders Institute, Netherlands
Abstract
Response inhibition is essential for navigating everyday life. Its derailment is considered integral to numerous neurological and psychiatric disorders, and more generally, to a wide range of behavioral and health problems. Response-inhibition efficiency furthermore correlates with treatment outcome in some of these conditions. The stop-signal task is an essential tool to determine how quickly response inhibition is implemented. Despite its apparent simplicity, there are many features (ranging from task design to data analysis) that vary across studies in ways that can easily compromise the validity of the obtained results. Our goal is to facilitate a more accurate use of the stop-signal task. To this end, we provide twelve easy-to-implement consensus recommendations and point out the problems that can arise when these are not followed. Furthermore we provide user-friendly open-source resources intended to inform statistical-power considerations, facilitate the correct implementation of the task, and assist in proper data analysis.
Data availability
The code used for the simulations and all simulated data can be found on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/rmqaw/)
-
Race model simulations to determine estimation bias and reliability of SSRT estimatesOpen Science Framework, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/JWSF9.
Article and author information
Author details
Frederick Verbruggen
Russell A Poldrack
Funding
H2020 European Research Council (769595)
- Frederick Verbruggen
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Copyright
© 2019, Verbruggen et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 15,829
- views
-
- 2,246
- downloads
-
- 570
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
A consensus guide to capturing the ability to inhibit actions and impulsive behaviors in the stop-signal task
eLife 8:e46323.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.46323
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
Millions of Americans suffering from Opioid Use Disorders face a high risk of fatal overdose due to opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD). Fentanyl, a powerful synthetic opioid, is a major contributor to the rising rates of overdose deaths. Reversing fentanyl overdoses has proved challenging due to its high potency and the rapid onset of OIRD. We assessed the contributions of central and peripheral mu opioid receptors (MORs) in mediating fentanyl-induced physiological responses. The peripherally restricted MOR antagonist naloxone methiodide (NLXM) both prevented and reversed OIRD to a degree comparable to that of naloxone (NLX), indicating substantial involvement of peripheral MORs to OIRD. Interestingly, NLXM-mediated OIRD reversal did not produce aversive behaviors observed after NLX. We show that neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract (nTS), the first central synapse of peripheral afferents, exhibit a biphasic activity profile following fentanyl exposure. NLXM pretreatment attenuates this activity, suggesting that these responses are mediated by peripheral MORs. Together, these findings establish a critical role for peripheral MORs, including ascending inputs to the nTS, as sites of dysfunction during OIRD. Furthermore, selective peripheral MOR antagonism could be a promising therapeutic strategy for managing OIRD by sparing CNS-driven acute opioid-associated withdrawal and aversion observed after NLX.
-
- Neuroscience
Recognizing and responding to threat cues is essential to survival. Freezing is a predominant threat behavior in rats. We have recently shown that a threat cue can organize diverse behaviors beyond freezing, including locomotion (Chu et al., 2024). However, that experimental design was complex, required many sessions, and had rats receive many foot shock presentations. Moreover, the findings were descriptive. Here, we gave female and male Long Evans rats cue light illumination paired or unpaired with foot shock (eight total) in a conditioned suppression setting using a range of shock intensities (0.15, 0.25, 0.35, or 0.50 mA). We found that conditioned suppression was only observed at higher foot shock intensities (0.35 mA and 0.50 mA). We constructed comprehensive temporal ethograms by scoring 22,272 frames across 12 behavior categories in 200-ms intervals around cue light illumination. The 0.50 mA and 0.35 mA shock-paired visual cues suppressed reward seeking, rearing, and scaling, as well as light-directed rearing and light-directed scaling. These shock-paired visual cues further elicited locomotion and freezing. Linear discriminant analyses showed that ethogram data could accurately classify rats into paired and unpaired groups. Using complete ethogram data produced superior classification compared to behavior subsets, including an immobility subset featuring freezing. The results demonstrate diverse threat behaviors – in a short and simple procedure – containing sufficient information to distinguish the visual fear conditioning status of individual rats.
