基于ERP的抑制控制实验范式对比分析  

Comparative Analysis between Flanker and Go/No Go Task:An ERP Study of Inhibitory Control Paradigm

作　　者：陈晨[1] 王宇 钟闰清 林盘 蓝文威 高军峰[1] 王湘[2] CHEN Chen;WANG Yu;ZHONG Run-qing;LIN Pan;LAN Wen-wei;GAO Jun-feng;WANG Xiang(Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science,State Ethnic Affairs Commission,School of Biomedical Engineering,South-Central University for Nationalities,Wuhan 430074,China;The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University,Changsha 410081,China;School of Psychology,Hunan Normal University,Changsha 410081,China;Key Laboratory for Cognition and Human Behavior of Hunan Province,Department of Psychology,Hunan Normal University,Changsha 410081,China)

机构地区：[1]中南民族大学生物医学工程学院,认知科学国家民委重点实验室,武汉430074 [2]中南大学湘雅二医院医学心理中心,长沙410011 [3]湖南师范大学心理学系,长沙410081 [4]认知与人类行为湖南省重点实验室,长沙410081

出　　处：《中国临床心理学杂志》2020年第5期867-871,890,共6页Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology

基　　金：国家自然科学基金(GZY17012,31671144);湖南省自然科学基金(2019JJ40362);湖南省教委资助课题(2017jy77);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(CZZ19004)。

摘　　要：目的:通过对Flanker和Go/No go两种抑制控制实验范式的脑电信号对比性分析,揭示抑制控制的认知神经机制,为抑制控制实验范式的选择与应用提供参考。方法:96名被试完成Flanker(干扰抑制)、Go/No go(反应抑制)任务。结果:两种实验范式在冲突条件下的错误率均大于无冲突条件下的错误率,且冲突条件比无冲突条件产生了更大的N200波幅。两种任务对比发现:反应抑制范式比干扰抑制范式产生更大的N200波幅,N200的潜伏期更晚,且脑地形图分布存在差异:Go/No go范式主要激活额中央区,而Flanker范式激活前额区与额中央区。结论:反应抑制和干扰抑制范式均具有有效性,但与干扰抑制相比,反应抑制需要消耗更多的认知资源。干扰抑制可能主要涉及早期感知加工阶段,而反应抑制涉及后期加工阶段对运动反应的调整或抑制,因此在对病理人群进行抑制控制研究时,应当结合疾病特异性选用不同抑制类型的范式。Objective:To compare the cognitive neural mechanism underlying two inhibitory control paradigms by Event-related Potentials(ERP)techique,and to provide evidences for the selection of experimental paradigm of inhibitory control in future.Methods:96 subjects completed both the interference inhibitory task(Flanker)and response inhibitory task(Go/No go).Results:For both experimental paradigms,the error rate of conflict condition is significantly greater than that of non-conflict condition,and the conflict condition induced N200 with significant higher amplitude than the non-conflict condition.The direct comparison between two tasks showed that,the response inhibitory task induced significantly greater N200 amplitude and longer latency than those of the interference inhibitory task.The brain topography map showed that the distribution of N200 on the scalp is significantly different between two paradigms.Specifically,the Go/No go task activated the frontocentral areas,while the Flanker task activated both the prefrontal and frontocentral areas.Conclusion:The current ERP study proved that the Flanker and Go/No go task are effective paradigms for exploring the response inhibitory and interference inhibitory processing.However,the response inhibitory processing requires more cognitive resources than the interference inhibitory processing which indicated that the interference inhibitory mainly involves the early perception processing stage but response inhibitory involves the adjustment or inhibitory of the movement response in the later processing stage.Therefore,different paradigm should be selected according to the functional impairment characteristics of different diseases when exploring the inhibitory control in the clinical samples.

关 键 词：抑制控制 Flanker任务 Go/No go任务 事件相关电位 

分 类 号：R395.1[哲学宗教—心理学]