PUB - Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld

The author examined whether the act of control of stopping is subject to the psychological refractory period (PRP) and whether stopping causes a PRP for the processing of subsequent stimuli. The task was to execute or to stop a rapid finger tapping. PRP interference was predicted for double-stimulation trials, in which 2 signals to tap or stop were presented in rapid succession. The experiments showed that stopping ongoing action is subject to and produces PRP interference similar to starting. Responses to signals to continue an ongoing action do not produce PRP interference. The results suggest that selection or initiation of new responses, but not mere response choice, constituted the processing bottleneck that caused the PRP in the present task. Further results indicate that the inhibition of not-yet-executed actions, in contrast to action termination, does not suffer PRP interference and that response inhibitions and terminations should be distinguished.