TY - JOUR
T1 - Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition
AU - Chatham, Christopher H.
AU - Claus, Eric D.
AU - Kim, Albert
AU - Curran, Tim
AU - Banich, Marie T.
AU - Munakata, Yuko
PY - 2012/2/27
Y1 - 2012/2/27
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857519114&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857519114&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0031546
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0031546
M3 - Article
C2 - 22384038
AN - SCOPUS:84857519114
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 7
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 2
M1 - e31546
ER -