J. Cogn. Neurosci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hackley, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Valle-Inclán, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hackley, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Valle-Inclán, F.
(Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 1999;11:321-329.)
© 1999 The MIT Press


Articles

Accessory Stimulus Effects on Response Selection: Does Arousal Speed Decision Making?

Steven A. Hackleya and Fernando Valle-Inclánb

a University of Missouri-Columbia
b University of La Coruña (Spain)

When an intense but task-irrelevant "accessory" stimulus accompanies the imperative stimulus in a choice reaction task, reaction times (RTs) are facilitated. In a similar previous study (Hackley & Valle-Inclán, 1998), we showed that this effect is not due to a reduction of the interval from onset of the lateralized readiness potential (LRP) until movement onset. In the present study, the RT task was modified to move a portion of the response selection stage into this time interval. The interval remained invariant, indicating that this late phase of the response selection process is not speeded by accessory stimulation. However, we observed amplitude modulation of the LRP on no-go trials in a condition with three alternative responses. This finding suggests that an earlier phase of response selection is influenced by accessory stimulation. In addition, a novel dependent measure was introduced to event-related potential research—the latency of spontaneous, posttrial blinking.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Percept PsychophysHome page
B. ROLKE
Temporal preparation facilitates perceptual identification of letters
Percept Psychophys, October 1, 2008; 70(7): 1305 - 1313.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Physiol.Home page
R. F. Reynolds and B. L. Day
Fast visuomotor processing made faster by sound
J. Physiol., September 15, 2007; 583(3): 1107 - 1115.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. H. Fecteau and D. P. Munoz
Warning Signals Influence Motor Processing
J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2007; 97(2): 1600 - 1609.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Cogn. Neurosci.Home page
M. C. DeSoto, M. Fabiani, D. C. Geary, and G. Gratton
When in Doubt, Do it Both Ways: Brain Evidence of the Simultaneous Activation of Conflicting Motor Responses in a Spatial Stroop Task
J. Cogn. Neurosci., May 1, 2001; 13(4): 523 - 536.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEURAL COMPUTATION J COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE MIT PRESS JOURNALS
Copyright © 1999 by The MIT Press.