MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7023888003

Premovement suppression of MEP amplitude is greater for simple and go/no-go reaction time tasks compared to choice reaction time

2023· article· en· W7023888003 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationAmplitudeTask (project management)Choice reaction timeSIGNAL (programming language)Interval (graph theory)Action (physics)Motor control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amplitude of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been shown to decrease in the brief interval (100-300ms) prior to response initiation in reaction time (RT) tasks. The underlying cause of this pre-movement MEP suppression is currently unclear. While some researchers suggest it is indicative of preparation-related inhibition processes preventing the premature release of planned action (i.e., a false start; Greenhouse et al. 2015), others have suggested it represents corticospinal suppression required to initiate a specific motor plan (Ibáñez et al. 2020). To differentiate between these proposed explanations, the present study explored whether the decrease in MEP amplitude leading up to a go-signal is affected by the preparation level of a motor response. Participants completed blocks of simple RT (SRT), choice RT (CRT), and go/no-go (GNG) tasks using a fixed 500ms foreperiod, while TMS was applied at various times between the warning signal and go-signal. It was hypothesized that if MEP suppression relates to preparation level, the greatest suppression would be observed prior to the SRT task since this paradigm allows for the largest amount of advance preparation (Donders, 1969). Results showed MEP amplitudes decreased for all tasks as the go-signal approached; however, both the SRT and GNG had smaller MEP amplitudes 50ms prior to, and coincident with the go-signal compared to the CRT (the task presumably allowing for the least amount of advance preparation). These results suggest the premovement suppression of MEP amplitude may be at least partially attributable to level of response preparation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies→French-language works237,207→