200 likes | 294 Views
An ERP investigation of response inhibition in adults with DCD Elisabeth Hill Duncan Brown José van Velzen. Background. Response inhibition - crucial for goal-directed behaviour in changing environment Frontoparietal network implicated (behavioural / ERP)
E N D
An ERP investigation of response inhibition in adults with DCDElisabeth HillDuncan BrownJosé van Velzen
Background • Response inhibition - crucial for goal-directed behaviour in changing environment • Frontoparietal network implicated (behavioural / ERP) • Mixed findings in children with DCD (e.g. Wilson et al., 1997; Mandich et al. 2002, 2003; Querne et al. 2009) • Adults?
Aims • Enhance understanding of response inhibition in DCD (Go/NoGo task) • Identify neurological mechanisms involved (with benefits for theory and intervention?) • Provide behavioural and neurophysiological evidence for continuation of coordination difficulty in adults with DCD
Participants Movement battery: p<.001
Infra-red starting position Possible probeLED Target button MIDLINE CROSSING STRAIGHT Experimental set-up Go/NoGo (delayed response) paradigm
Experimental set-up 1000 msec between trials
900msec Hand cue: 200 msec 1000 msec between trials
900msec Hand cue: 200 msec 1000 msec between trials
Probe flashed: 100 msec 900msec Hand cue: 200 msec 1000 msec between trials
** GO STOP 200msec Probe flashed: 100 msec 900msec Hand cue: 200 msec 1000 msec between trials
** P300 250-450 msec post STOP N200 150-350 msec post STOP Response initiated or withheld GO STOP 200msec Probe flashed: 100 msec 900msec Hand cue: 200 msec 1000 msec between trials
Dependent variables • Compare: • Group (DCD vs. typical) • Movement type (straight vs. midline) • Behavioural results: • Inhibitory errors (fail to STOP) • ERPs: • N200; P300
ERP predictions • N200 / P300: • increased in midline vs. straight movement (typicals) • decreased and delayed in DCD (vs. typical)
Behavioural results group p<.001; movement p .001 group x condition p<.05
N200 (150-350 msec post STOP) Frontal regions group .005; movement ns group x movement ns
P300 (250-450 msec post STOP, shown 300-600 msec) Central regions group ns; movement ns group x movement ns
Summary • More inhibitory errors in DCD vs. typical group • N200: • Greater enhancement in typical vs. DCD group • P300: • No differences between groups
Implications • Inhibition (Go/No go) difficulties in adults with DCD • Biological underpinning (electrophysiological correlates) • Possible involvement of anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), prefrontal cortex (PFC) cf. N200? • Lifespan development
EEG acquisition • EEG was recorded continuously with Ag/AgCl electrodes via 64 channel Biosemi system with linked earlobe reference. • Signals were amplified with a bandpass width of 0.1-100Hz and sampling rate was set at 512 Hz. • Data segments were epoched to 100 ms prior to onset of probe onset and 500 ms after probe onset for each movement condition. • Individual trials containing eye movement artifacts and errors were rejected before the averaging process. • Early visual-spatial potential N1(amplitude) was isolated (defined as negative going peak 100-300 ms post probe onset) and used for comparison of sensory gating of attended locations within visual perception