SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

A neurocomputational theory of action regulation predicts motor behavior in neurotypical individuals and patients with Parkinson's disease.

PLoS Comput Biol · 2022-11-17

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010111PMID: 36395336

Open accessresearch-article; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Surviving in an uncertain environment requires not only the ability to select the best action, but also the flexibility to withhold inappropriate actions when the environmental conditions change. Although selecting and withholding actions have been extensively studied in both human and animals, there is still lack of consensus on the mechanism underlying these action regulation functions, and more importantly, how they inter-relate. A critical gap impeding progress is the lack of a computational theory that will integrate the mechanisms of action regulation into a unified framework. The current study aims to advance our understanding by developing a neurodynamical computational theory that models the mechanism of action regulation that involves suppressing responses, and predicts how disruption of this mechanism can lead to motor deficits in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. We tested the model predictions in neurotypical individuals and PD patients in three behavioral tasks that involve free action selection between two opposed directions, action selection in the presence of conflicting information and abandoning an ongoing action when a stop signal is presented. Our results and theory suggest an integrated mechanism of action regulation that affects both action initiation and inhibition. When this mechanism is disrupted, motor behavior is affected, leading to longer reaction times and higher error rates in action inhibition.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.