The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.

The present study investigated the interplay between selective inhibition (the ability to suppress specific competing responses) and nonselective inhibition (the ability to suppress any inappropriate response) during single word production. To this end, we combined two well-established research para...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruben D Vromans, Suzanne R Jongman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5945011?pdf=render
_version_ 1818934270658347008
author Ruben D Vromans
Suzanne R Jongman
author_facet Ruben D Vromans
Suzanne R Jongman
author_sort Ruben D Vromans
collection DOAJ
description The present study investigated the interplay between selective inhibition (the ability to suppress specific competing responses) and nonselective inhibition (the ability to suppress any inappropriate response) during single word production. To this end, we combined two well-established research paradigms: the picture-word interference task and the stop-signal task. Selective inhibition was assessed by instructing participants to name target pictures (e.g., dog) in the presence of semantically related (e.g., cat) or unrelated (e.g., window) distractor words. Nonselective inhibition was tested by occasionally presenting a visual stop-signal, indicating that participants should withhold their verbal response. The stop-signal was presented early (250 ms) aimed at interrupting the lexical selection stage, and late (325 ms) to influence the word-encoding stage of the speech production process. We found longer naming latencies for pictures with semantically related distractors than with unrelated distractors (semantic interference effect). The results further showed that, at both delays, stopping latencies (i.e., stop-signal RTs) were prolonged for naming pictures with semantically related distractors compared to pictures with unrelated distractors. Taken together, our findings suggest that selective and nonselective inhibition, at least partly, share a common inhibitory mechanism during different stages of the speech production process.
first_indexed 2024-12-20T05:01:37Z
format Article
id doaj.art-d1d94f6b97354268b8ba0437e2091fc8
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-20T05:01:37Z
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-d1d94f6b97354268b8ba0437e2091fc82022-12-21T19:52:33ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01135e019731310.1371/journal.pone.0197313The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.Ruben D VromansSuzanne R JongmanThe present study investigated the interplay between selective inhibition (the ability to suppress specific competing responses) and nonselective inhibition (the ability to suppress any inappropriate response) during single word production. To this end, we combined two well-established research paradigms: the picture-word interference task and the stop-signal task. Selective inhibition was assessed by instructing participants to name target pictures (e.g., dog) in the presence of semantically related (e.g., cat) or unrelated (e.g., window) distractor words. Nonselective inhibition was tested by occasionally presenting a visual stop-signal, indicating that participants should withhold their verbal response. The stop-signal was presented early (250 ms) aimed at interrupting the lexical selection stage, and late (325 ms) to influence the word-encoding stage of the speech production process. We found longer naming latencies for pictures with semantically related distractors than with unrelated distractors (semantic interference effect). The results further showed that, at both delays, stopping latencies (i.e., stop-signal RTs) were prolonged for naming pictures with semantically related distractors compared to pictures with unrelated distractors. Taken together, our findings suggest that selective and nonselective inhibition, at least partly, share a common inhibitory mechanism during different stages of the speech production process.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5945011?pdf=render
spellingShingle Ruben D Vromans
Suzanne R Jongman
The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
PLoS ONE
title The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
title_full The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
title_fullStr The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
title_full_unstemmed The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
title_short The interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production.
title_sort interplay between selective and nonselective inhibition during single word production
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5945011?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT rubendvromans theinterplaybetweenselectiveandnonselectiveinhibitionduringsinglewordproduction
AT suzannerjongman theinterplaybetweenselectiveandnonselectiveinhibitionduringsinglewordproduction
AT rubendvromans interplaybetweenselectiveandnonselectiveinhibitionduringsinglewordproduction
AT suzannerjongman interplaybetweenselectiveandnonselectiveinhibitionduringsinglewordproduction