The Pause-then-Cancel model of human action-stopping: Theoretical considerations and empirical evidence

Abstract

The ability to stop already-initiated actions is a key cognitive control ability. Recent work on human action-stopping has been dominated by two controversial debates. First, the contributions (and neural signatures) of attentional orienting and motor inhibition after stop-signals are near-impossible to disentangle. Second, the timing of purportedly inhibitory (neuro)physiological activity after stop-signals has called into question which neural signatures reflect processes that actually contribute to action-stopping. Here, we propose that a two-stage model of action-stopping – proposed by Schmidt and Berke (2017) based on subcortical rodent recordings – may resolve these controversies. Translating this model to humans, we first argue that attentional orienting and motor inhibition are inseparable because orienting to salient events like stop-signals automatically invokes broad motor inhibition, reflecting a fast-acting, ubiquitous Pause process. We then argue that inhibitory signatures after stop-signals differ in latency because they map onto two sequential stages: the salience-related Pause and a slower, stop-specific Cancel process. We formulate the model, discuss recent supporting evidence in humans, and interpret existing data within its context.