Flanker Task And Inhibition

Student # 4046778
1

Electrophysiological correlates of Response Inhibition




Michael Smith

University of Wollongong









Subject: Biological Psychology PSYC 234

Assignment: Lab Report

Student No: 4046778

Tutor: Genevieve Steiner

Submitted: 29/06/2013

Word Count: 1497










Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
2
Abstract
The ability to stay task focussed and avoid the influence of distractions is
important in everyday life. This ability is known as response inhibition theory
and is an important aspect of executive function. Using an Erkisen flanker
task, the aim of this study was to see if cueing either correctly or incorrectly
would effect reaction times ,error rates and N2 ERP amplitude, to test the
theory of response inhibition and further identify its locus and function. 82
first year psychology students underwent a modified Erkisen flanker task
whilst be measure via computer and EEG. As hypothesised, cueing before
each flanker presentation did have an effect upon all three measurements.
Evidence indicates that response inhibition is located in the frontal lobes, and
is a process of executive function enabling a person to stay task focussed.
These findings may help health professionals to better understand and treat
those who have deficiencies regarding inhibition and attention, such as
AD/HD.

Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
3

Electrophysiological correlates of response inhibition

The brains ability to organise and sequence incoming information whilst
excluding distracting factors is known as response inhibition theory. Response
inhibition (RI) is considered to be a fundamental process of executive function
(EF), executive function is a theory concerned with processes involved in the
planning, decision making, and initiation of behaviours. (Kopp, Rist &
Mattler, 1996). RI is an important marker developmental and cognitive
maturation. An understanding of processes within the brain that enable people
to inhibit behaviours, thoughts and exclude distractions may be instrumental
in comprehending the aetiology of mental disorders such as AD/HD
(Johnstone, Roodenrys, Blackman Johnstone, Loveday, Mantz & Barratt,
2012), and possibly OCD and Schizophrenia. The theory of response
inhibition suggests inhibition is localised in the prefrontal lobes (Heil, Osman,
Weigelmann, Rolke & Henninghausen, 2000). Deficits in RI are evident when
neurophysiological damage to the pre-frontal area has occurred. (Heil et al.,
2000). Inhibitory control within the prefrontal cortex has also been cited
during PET and rCBF data gathered during a Stroop task experiment (Bench,
Frith, Grasby, Friston, Paulesu, Frackowiak & Dolan 1993). Casey, Geidd and
Thomas (2000) found in a go no-go task using fMRI on children and
teenagers that RI is initiated within the prefrontal lobes.
To examine the theories of EF and RI, previous research has employed
the flanker task (Gehring et al., 1992; Heil et al., 2000; Kopp et al., 1996),
which was based on the seminal work of Eriksen and Eriksen (1974). The
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
4
original work by Eriksen and Eriksen (1974) tested participants reaction
times (RT) using target letters flanked by noise letters in five different
conditions. Kopp et al. (1996), Gehring et al. (1992), Heil et al. (2000) altered
many of the independent variables in an attempt to isolate the locus of these
events within the brain. Kopp et al. (1996) altered the experiment by using
arrowheads and congruent, incongruent and neutral flankers and differing
spatial distances between flanker and target. They also measured reaction
times and introduced measurements of event related potentials (ERP) via
electroencephalogram (EEG). Gehring et al. (1992), retained the same method
as Erikson and Erikson (1974), but included a cueing effect displayed before
each target/flanker trial, and also measured RT and ERP. Heil et al. (2000)
employed letters as targets, and flankers were increased by 200% to increase
influence, no cueing was used. The findings of previous research were similar
as RT were considerably slower for incongruent flankers and error rates were
higher. ERP N2 data from studies by Kopp et al. (1996), Gehring et al. (1992),
Heil et al. (2000) all point to localization of RI in the frontal (Fz) site. N2
amplitude was highest for conditions where incorrect cueing along with
incongruent flankers were utilised. (Gehring et al., 1992). This demonstrates
RI was occurring, as participants had to withhold their responses to make the
correct decision about the target. The previous research has attempted to
uncover the location and isolate the moment of response inhibition. However,
all the combinations employed failed to include the exact combination of
arrows as targets and flankers along with correct and incorrect cues, that this
study has utilised.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
5
To test the hypotheses and ascertain if cueing responses before the
stimulus will result in different reaction times and error rates and in increases
to N2 ERP amplitude, participants were asked to perform a modified Eriksen
flanker task whilst being measured via EEG. In line with Heil et al. (2000) it
is predicted that error rates will be greater for incongruent than congruent
trials, and trials that were incorrectly cued compared to correctly cued.
Similarly, as was predicted by Eriksen & Eriksen (1974), reaction times will
be greater for incongruent than congruent trials. Likewise as Gehring et al.
(1992) forecasted, it is predicted reaction time for trials will be greater for
incorrectly cued compared to correctly cued.
Regarding N2 amplitude, the N2 will be maximal in frontal regions. Likewise
Fz N2 will be greater in incongruent rather than congruent trials. Finally, there
will be an interaction between the cue and trial type, that is, the incongruent /
congruent effect for Fz N2 amplitude will be larger for incorrectly rather than
the correctly cued condition, this was also predicted by Gehring et al. (1992).
Method
Participants
Eighty two subjects (M = 24.1 years, SD = 7.9 years) participated, with
74 included in the analysis. Exclusions were due to technical problems. The
ratio of male to female participants was 1:7. Subjects participated as a means
of partially fulfilling course requirements for an undergraduate university
subject.

Procedure
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
6

Participants completed a demographic and screening questionnaire.
All participants were then fitted with an Electrocap, and eye and ear
electrodes before being seated in an air-conditioned booth one metre from a
computer monitor, and presented with a visual computer simulation of a cued
Eriksen Flanker task for approximately 60 minutes.

Each trial began with a fixation cross presented in the centre of the
screen for 200 ms, followed by a cue (non-specific or directional ) also
presented for 200 ms in the centre of the computer screen, followed by a blank
screen for 800 ms. Next, a sequence of 5 stimuli (a combination of <, >,
and/or =) was presented for 200 ms. The inter-trial interval varied between
1500 and 1800 ms (M = 1650 ms). Target stimuli were central to the display
and consisted of either an arrow pointing to the left, or an arrow pointing to
the right (i.e., < or >), and were flanked by 4 distracters (either arrows or
neutral stimuli).

Participants were instructed to focus on the central (target) stimulus,
while the surrounding (flanking) stimuli were irrelevant to the task. If the
target stimulus was a right-pointing arrow, participants were instructed to
respond with their right hand by pressing the Ctrl key on the right hand side
of the keyboard. Similarly, if the target was a left-pointing arrow, participants
were instructed to respond with their left hand by pressing the Alt key on
the left hand side of the keyboard. Participants were also instructed that a cue
would precede each trial, and would either provide no information about the
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
7
following trials (i.e., non-specific cue), or correctly predict the direction of the
target stimulus in most cases (i.e., directional cues). Participants were
instructed to use directional cues to facilitate their response to the subsequent
trial. Participants were asked to respond only to the trial sequence and not to
the cue.

The three cue types were presented with equal probability. Non-
specific cues did not provide any information regarding the nature of the
target, while the specific (directional) cues correctly predicted the direction of
the target arrow in 80% of cases. Each trial was presented pseudo-randomly,
such that no two identical trials occurred consecutively. In congruent trials,
the target arrow was flanked by distracter arrows pointing in the same
direction (e.g., >> > >>). For incongruent trials, the target arrow was flanked
by distracter arrows pointing in the opposite direction (e.g., << > <<). For
neutral trials, the target arrow was flanked by neutral stimuli (i.e. == > ==).
Each of these conditions was preceded by either a non-specific cue or a
specific cue.

There were 24 practice trials, and 6 blocks of 180 experimental trials.

The continuous scalp electroencephalogram was recorded using an
Electro-cap from 19 electrode sites (Fp
1
, Fp
2
, F
z
, F
3
, F
4
, F
7
,

F
8
,

C
z
,

C
3
,

C
4
,

T
3
,

T
4
,

T
5
,

T
6
,

P
z
,

P
3
,

P
4
,

O
1
, and

O
2
), referenced to linked ears, and grounded by
an electrode fitted on the Electro-cap midway between FPz and Fz. The
electro-oculogram (EOG) was recorded vertically (vEOG) via tin cup
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
8
electrodes placed 2cm above and below the left eye, and horizontally using
electrodes placed beyond the outer canthus of each eye. Impedance was kept
below five k for the cap and EOG electrodes, and below three k for the ear
electrodes. EEG was recorded (via Neuroscan software) at 500Hz using a DC
procedure.

Data Extraction
The ERP epoch began 100 ms prior to stimulus presentation and ended
900 ms post stimulus presentation. The data were baselined using the 100 ms
pre-stimulus period, and were filtered down 48 dB at 32 Hz. Epochs were
rejected if participants responded before 200 ms or after 1000 ms following
stimulus presentation, or if they responded incorrectly. Epochs were also
rejected if amplitudes exceeded 100 V at EOG or any scalp site.
Baseline-to-peak amplitudes and latencies were calculated for the N2
component identified from the grand mean ERPs. All data was then inputted
to an SPSS data file.

Data Analysis
Behavioural data
The percentage of correct responses and reaction time for each trial
type were analysed, with differences between stimulus and cue types assessed
using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Planned contrasts for both error rate
and reaction time separately compared congruent and incongruent stimuli, and
correct cues with incorrect cue types.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
9
Physiological data
Analyses of ERP amplitudes were restricted to the sites F3, Fz, F4, C3,
Cz, C4, P3, Pz, and P4, in a 3 x 3 (lateral x sagittal) matrix. One-way
repeated measures ANOVAs were carried out for Error Rate and Reaction
Time comparing Congruent vs. Incongruent stimuli, and separately Correct
vs. Incorrect cues. A one-way repeated measures ANOVA was carried out for
N2 amplitude comparing frontal and parietal recording sites. A repeated
measures ANOVA was carried out on frontal N2 amplitude with Stimulus
(congruent, incongruent) x Cue (correct, incorrect) as within-subject factors.
Planned contrasts on the Stimulus factor compared congruent and incongruent
trials. Planned contrasts for the Cue factor compared correct vs. incorrect
cues. A planned contrast on the Recording Site factor compared frontal
activity with parietal activity. All contrasts reported for analyses here have (1,
73) degrees of freedom.
Results
Mean error rates, reaction times and N2, for the variables congruent and
incongruent, and correct and incorrect were calculated, and one-way repeated
measures ANOVAs were performed, all at an alpha level of .05.
The error rate was higher for incongruent than congruent flankers,
results were statistically significant F (1, 73) = 17.9, p < .001, for relevant
mean and SD, see Figure 1.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
10












0
5
10
15
20
25
Congruent Incongruent
E
r
r
o
r

R
a
t
e

%

Flankers
Figure 1. Mean error rate for congruent and incongruent flankers,
error bars represent standard deviation.

Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
11
Similarly, error rate for incorrect cues was higher than correct cues,
results were statistically significant F (1, 73) = 7.6, p < .05, for relevant mean
and SD, see Figure 2.








0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Correct Incorrect
E
r
r
o
r

R
a
t
e

%

Cues
Figure 2. Mean error rates for correct and incorrect cues, error bars
represent standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
12
Reaction times for incongruent were greater than congruent, results
were statistically significant F (1, 73) = 126.6, p < .001, for relevant mean and
SD, see Figure 3.









0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Congruent Incongruent
R
e
a
c
t
i
o
n

t
i
m
e

(
m
s
)

Flankers
Figure 3. Mean Reaction times in milliseconds for congruent and
incongruent flankers, error bars represent standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
13
Reaction times for incorrect was greater than correct, and was
statistically significant F (1, 73) = 9.0, p <.05, for relevant mean and SD, see
Figure 4.









405
410
415
420
425
430
435
440
445
450
455
460
465
470
475
480
485
490
495
500
505
510
515
520
525
530
535
540
Correct Incorrect
R
e
a
c
t
i
o
n

T
i
m
e

(
m
s
)

Cues
Figure 4. Mean reaction times in milliseconds for correct and incorrect cues,
error bars show standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
14
Results of N2 were greater for frontal than parietal sites, this was
statistically significant F (1, 73) = 34.4, p <.01, for relevant mean and SD, see
Figure 5.










-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Frontal Parietal

V

N2 Sites
Figure 5. Mean N2 amplitude (topography) measured in microvolts,
error bars show the standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
15
N2 trial amplitude was higher for congruent than incongruent, results
were statistically significant F (1, 73) = 12.2, p <.001, for relevant mean and
SD, see Figure 6.








-11
-10
-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Congruent Incongruent

V

N2 Amplitude
Figure 6. Mean N2 amplitude measured in microvolts, regarding congruent and
incongruent flankers during trials, error bars denote standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
16
Finally, in the cue / stimulus cross comparisons it was found that the
incorrectly cued / incongruent condition displayed the highest N2 amplitude,
followed by correctly cued / incongruent, incorrectly cued / congruent, and
finally correctly cued / congruent conditions. Findings were statistically
significant F (1, 73) = 19.3, p < .01, for results of mean and SD see Figure 7.


Discussion
This study has attempted to uncover the relationship between cueing a
stimulus and the outcomes as measured in reaction times, error rates and N2
amplitude. Participants took part in a modified Eriksen flanker task, and data
was collected via computer and EEG. The results support all hypotheses, and
-12
-11
-10
-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Congruent Incongruent
N
2

(
F
z

o
n
l
y
)

V

Flankers
Correct
Incorrect
Figure 7. Mean N2 amplitude for Fz only, measured in microvolts, obtained for
congruent and incongruent flankers, when either correctly cued (80% of trials),
or incorrectly cued (20% of trials). Error bars denote standard deviation.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
17
most importantly they confirm that cueing a stimulus has an effect upon
reaction times, error rates and N2 amplitude.
The findings of this study are consistent with previous research,
demonstrating that more errors along with slower reaction times are produced
on the flanker task when the flankers are incongruent (Kopp et al., 1996).
Gehring et al. (1992) also found that the N2 amplitude was greater for the
incongruent condition and most prominent at the Fz site. More importantly
this study was able to replicate the findings of Heil et al. (2000), who found
that incorrectly priming before the no-go condition, along with the
incompatible flanker / target condition did indeed produce greater N2
amplitude at the Fz site. This was important as the main aim of this study was
to detect the effect of cueing upon N2 amplitude and the data indicates that RI
was occurring. This study provides additional evidence that RI is located in
the frontal region of the brain, and is a valid theory and an integral process of
executive function theory.
Response inhibition, its locus and the ability to measure it from
activation to deactivation may prove an important tool for scientists,
psychologists, and psychiatrists. As Johnstone et al. (2012) points out,
cognitive behavioural inhibition training can lead to behavioural improvement
in children with AD/HD. It may also provide a possible means for providing
better diagnosis, treatment and management of illnesses that involve a similar
lack of ability to self-regulate and inhibit behaviour and thoughts. Diseases
such as schizophrenia, bi-polar, OCD, and those prone to alcohol and drug
abuse.
Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
18
This study was limited by the fact that participants were selected from
those completing first year university psychology degrees, and therefore,
results may not be truly indicative of the general population. There was also a
disproportionate amount of females to males (7:1) that may have affected the
results.
Future research that includes a more diverse sample of the population
is needed. Research involving those who have demonstrable self-regulation
deficiencies, such as those with AD/HD is also in need. This may help to
increase the validity and scope of the research. As Heil et al. (2000) points
out, the N2 effect is not so distinguished when the stimuli is auditory, another
line of research that needs further enquiry.
In conclusion, this study revealed that cueing does have an effect upon
reaction times, error rates, and N2 amplitude. This supports the theory of
response inhibition as being an aspect of executive function theory. However,
future research is needed to further isolate the locus and function of inhibition.
Studies into methods that improve or strengthen response inhibition may
produce new therapies in regards to self-regulation deficiencies. This research
is important for those in the health industry, and more importantly for those
who have mental illnesses where a lack of self-regulation is a contributing
factor to the severity of that illness.

Flanker Task And Inhibition
Student # 4046778
19
References
Bench, C. J., Frith, C. D., Grasby, P. M., Friston, K. J., Paulesu, E., Frackowiak,
R. S. J., & Dolan, R. J. (1993). Investigations of the functional anatomy
of attention using the Stroop test. Neuropsychologia, 31, 907-902.
Casey, B. J., Giedd, J. N., Thomas, K. M. (2000). Structural and functional
brain development and its relation to cognitive development. Biological
Psychology, 54, 241-257.
Erikson, B. A., & Erikson. C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the
identification of target letter in a non-search task. Perception and
Psychophysics, 16(1), 143-149.
Gehring, W. J., Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1992). Probability
Effects on Stimulus Evaluation and Response Processes. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(1),
198-216.
Heil, M., Osman, A., Weigelmann, J., Rolke, B., & Henninghausen, E. (2000).
N200 in the Erikson-Task: Inhibitory Executive Processes? Journal of
Psychophysiology, 14, 218-225.
Johnstone, S. J., Roodenrys, S., Blackman, R., Johnston, E., Loveday, K.,
Mantz, S., & Barratt, M. F. (2012). Neurocognitive training for children
with and without AD/HD. ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity
Disorders, 4, 11-23.
Kopp, B., Rist, F., & Mattler, U. (1996). N200 in the flanker task as a
neurobiological tool for investigating executive control.
Psychophysiology, 33, 282-294.