Stopping and Changing Expected and Unexpected Movements

The capacity to cancel or adapt planned actions in response to changing environmental demands is essential for navigating our complex world. While past research has shown that an individual's expectations of upcoming movement demands influence the speed of action initiation, the effect this has on subsequent cancellation or adaption of that movement remains unknown. 25 healthy adults completed stop signal tasks and stop change tasks in which biasing cues (e.g., "70% left") accurately indicated the probability that a left, or right button press would be required. As expected, responses that were congruent with the cue were faster than incongruent responses; however, biasing cues had no effect on behavioural or physiological (electromyographical) indices of stopping speed. Stopping latencies were found to be faster in the stop change task than the stop signal task, corroborating other recent work. However, a second experiment (25 healthy adults) which used the same stimuli for both tasks (varying only the instructions), revealed no difference - highlighting the sensitivity of the stop process to stimulus effects, and a common confound in the literature. We also observed that physiological indices of action reprogramming (following a stop) were faster in congruent than incongruent trials. Collectively, these results suggests that preparatory changes that accompany expected movements influence the enaction of movement both prior to, and after stopping, but the stop mechanism itself, remains independent of these preparations. These results inform how action cancellation and adaption are applied in real world environments, where expectations continually interface with our motor plans.