Cortical Oscillatory Dynamics Through the Lens of Affordance Competition- a Novel Perspective on 'Selection for Action'.
TL;DR
Electrophysiological findings from the fields of attention, memory, motor cognition, and cognitive control were reevaluated and reinterpreted from the perspective of the Affordance Competition hypothesis and it was concluded that inhibition or inhibitory control is not unitary but rather present throughout the entire range of processes, from initial sensory processing to final response execution.
Abstract
Electrophysiological findings from the fields of attention, memory, motor cognition, and cognitive control were reevaluated and reinterpreted from the perspective of the Affordance Competition (AC) hypothesis. This hypothesis assumes that multiple actions may be specified already at an early processing level and compete with each other before an action is selected. This perspective implies a significant role for inhibitory mechanisms as the competition between specified actions needs to be resolved. We propose that this inhibition is reflected in delta, theta, alpha, and beta oscillations, challenging classical interpretations of various electrophysiological phenomena related to these oscillations. Based on reported effects with different foci and temporal characteristics in the aforementioned frequency bands across a wide range of experimental paradigms, it was concluded that inhibition or inhibitory control is not unitary but rather present throughout the entire range of processes, from initial sensory processing to final response execution. The AC hypothesis predicts that attentional competition is dominated by action-related aspects rather than by perceptual or sensory limitations. Therefore, inhibition of a distractor stimulus in a bilateral array should depend on its action history. This prediction has been confirmed in a few studies. Finally, we explored the relationship between the AC hypothesis and other theoretical approaches, such as the Binding and Retrieval in Action Control framework. This exploration further emphasized that the classical "sense-think-act" models do not properly explain a broad range of behavioral and electrophysiological findings.