The Experts below are selected from a list of 2049 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Philip S. Holzman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Antisaccade Task and neuropsychological tests of prefrontal cortical integrity in schizophrenia: empirical findings and interpretative considerations.
World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 2004Co-Authors: Deborah L. Levy, Nancy R. Mendell, Philip S. HolzmanAbstract:To date, every published study of the Antisaccade Task has replicated the finding that schizophrenia patients make an increased number of errors. This finding has been interpreted as support for frontal and/or basal ganglia dysfunction in schizophrenia, primarily because neurological patients with pathology in these brain regions also make large numbers of errors on the Antisaccade Task. Here, we compared the performance of schizophrenia patients and nonpsychiatric controls on an Antisaccade Task and on two neuropsychological tests, the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, which is assumed to tap frontal lobe functioning, and the interference condition of the Stroop Test, which is thought to tap dorsolateral prefrontal cortex/anterior cingulate functioning. We examined the pattern of intercorrelations among these Tasks. Schizophrenia patients made significantly more errors on the Antisaccade Task, made more perseverative errors and achieved fewer categories on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, and were significantly slower during the interference condition of the Stroop Test than were nonpsychiatric controls. Antisaccade errors were significantly correlated with interference performance on the Stroop in schizophrenia patients and in controls, but were not significantly correlated with the measures of Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance in either group. The pattern of intercorrelation suggests that these Tasks should not be thought of as representing a unitary variable of "frontal cortical integrity". Although aspects of these Tasks tap the ability to inhibit prepotent responses, each Task is also behaviorally complex. The multifaceted nature of these Tasks makes it difficult to isolate which brain regions are part of the network underlying the specific act of inhibiting a prepotent response (for example, the reflexive saccade toward the novel peripheral target) and which regions participate in aspects of Task performance that are related to non-inhibitory components (for example, executing an Antisaccade). A broadly distributed network is undoubtedly involved in both processes. Parsing the various components of cognitively complex Tasks may help to clarify both the specific behaviors that are anomalous and their underlying neural substrates. We also address the complexity of inferring localized brain dysfunction in schizophrenia patients based on seemingly analogous behavioral deficits in neurological populations.
-
Antisaccade performance is abnormal in schizophrenia patients but not in their biological relatives
Schizophrenia Research, 2003Co-Authors: Joanna Brownstein, Olga Krastoshevsky, Courtney Mccollum, Sapna Kundamal, Nancy R. Mendell, Steven Matthysse, Philip S. Holzman, Deborah L. LevyAbstract:Numerous studies have replicated the finding that schizophrenia patients make an increased number of errors on an Antisaccade Task. Some studies have reported that relatives of schizophrenia patients also make an increased number of Antisaccade errors, a finding that has been interpreted to support the usefulness of compromised Antisaccade performance as an index of genetic liability for schizophrenia. We examined performance on an Antisaccade Task in schizophrenia patients, nonpsychiatric controls, first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients and first-degree relatives of nonpsychiatric controls. Schizophrenia patients made significantly more errors than did nonpsychiatric controls, but relatives of schizophrenia patients did not differ from relatives of controls or from all controls. Increased Antisaccade errors on the standard version of the Antisaccade Task are associated with schizophrenia, but do not seem to be a co-familial trait for schizophrenia.
-
Antisaccades and smooth pursuit eye movements in schizophrenia.
Biological Psychiatry, 1995Co-Authors: Andrea Borges Sereno, Philip S. HolzmanAbstract:Saccadic and smooth pursuit eye movements were recorded in schizophrenic patients, nonschizophrenic psychiatric patients, and normal controls. Both schizophrenic subjects and psychiatric controls demonstrated greater increases in error rates and greater delays in generating Antisaccades than did normal controls. Schizophrenic patients with impaired smooth pursuit tracking showed greater increases in error rates in the Antisaccade Task than did schizophrenic patients with normal pursuit. Among psychiatric controls, increased errors on the Antisaccade Task were unrelated to pursuit performance. The small size of this group, however, reduces the power to detect a relation between smooth pursuit tracking and performance on the Antisaccade Task. Although most patients were receiving one or more medications, some of which can affect eye movements, medication state in this study did not account for differences we report in dependent variables.
Klaas E. Stephan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behaviour a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
European Journal of Neuroscience, 2019Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit stimulus-driven, habitual responses, in favour of complex, voluntary actions. In addition, humans can also alternate between different Tasks. This comes at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the "Task-switch cost." While Task switching and inhibitory control have been studied extensively, the interaction between them has received relatively little attention. Here, we used the SERIA model, a computational model of Antisaccade behaviour, to draw a bridge between them. We investigated Task switching in two versions of the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. SERIA revealed that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists onto the next trial, independently of the upcoming trial type. Moreover, switching between Tasks induces slower and less accurate voluntary responses compared to repeat trials. However, this only occurs when participants lack the time to prepare the correct response. Altogether, SERIA demonstrates that there is a reconfiguration cost associated with switching between voluntary actions. In addition, the enhanced inhibition that follows Antisaccade but not prosaccade trials explains asymmetric switch costs. In conclusion, SERIA offers a novel model of Task switching that unifies previous theoretical accounts by distinguishing between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and could help explain similar phenomena in paradigms beyond the Antisaccade Task.
-
inhibition failures and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of cue delay
Journal of Neurophysiology, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:In this article, we use a computational model to study the mixed Antisaccade Task. We contrast two conditions in which the Task cue is presented either before or concurrently with the saccadic targ...
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and goal directed behavior a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:When instructed to alternate between different Tasks, humans require more time and are less accurate than when they repeat the same Task. This decrease in performance is referred to as the 9Task switch cost9. Several behavioral studies have investigated this phenomenon in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction of a peripheral stimulus. These reports have provided conflicting answers as to whether a cue to saccade away from a target leads to positive, negative, or no switch costs. These contradictory findings are paralleled by two opposing theoretical hypotheses which focus on Task-set inertia and oculomotor inhibition, respectively. Here, we applied a computational, generative model to data from a mixed Antisaccade Task in which the peripheral visual stimulus also served as a trial type cue. Behaviorally, we found reaction time and error rate switch costs on pro- and Antisaccade trials. Modeling revealed that these costs were due to two different effects. First, Antisaccade trials enhanced inhibitory control on the following trial, resulting in fewer but faster inhibition failures. Second, goal-directed actions displayed a Task-inertia effect, in that rule these were slower on switch trials compared to repeat trials. Our results shed light on the general phenomena of Task switching, by demonstrating two types of switch cost that affect differently the inhibition of habitual responses and the initiation of goal-directed actions.
-
Switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behavior: A computational study of the Antisaccade Task
2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:Abstract An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit habitual responses in order to initiate complex, rule-guided actions. Moreover, humans have also the ability to alternate between different sets of rules or Tasks, at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the ‘Task switch cost’. While it is recognized that switching between Tasks requires often to inhibit habitual responses, the interaction between these two forms of cognitive control has been much less studied than each of them separately. Here, we use a computational model to draw a bridge between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and thereby provide a novel account of seemingly paradoxical findings in the Task switch literature. We investigated Task switching in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. Our model demonstrates that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists on the next trial. However, enhanced inhibition affects only the probability of generating habitual responses, and, contrary to previous accounts, cannot be characterized as proactive Task interference. In addition, our model demonstrates that voluntary actions (but not habitual responses) are slower and more prompt to errors on switch trials compared to repeat trials. We conclude that precisely the interaction between these two effects explains a variety of contradictory findings reported in the literature.
-
inhibitory and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of Task design
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Jakob Heinzle, Klaas E. StephanAbstract:In the Antisaccade Task, participants are instructed to saccade in the opposite direction of a peripheral visual cue (PVC). Interestingly, several psychiatric disorders are associated with increased error rates in this paradigm. Despite this observation, there is no consensus about the mechanism behind Antisaccade errors: while often explained as inhibition failures, some studies have suggested that errors are caused by deficits in the ability to initiate voluntary saccades. Using a computational model, we recently showed that under some conditions high latency errors can be explained by a race process between voluntary pro- and Antisaccades. A limitation of our findings is that in our previous experiment the PVC signaled the trial type (pro- or Antisaccade), whereas in most studies, subjects are informed about the trial type before the PVC is presented. We refer to these Task designs as asynchronous (AC) and synchronous cues (SC) conditions. Here, we investigated to which extent differences in design affect the type and frequency of errors in the Antisaccade Task. Twenty-four subjects participated in mixed blocks of pro- and Antisaccade trials in both conditions. Our results demonstrate that Antisaccade error rates were highly correlated across conditions and a non-negligible fraction of them were classified as late errors in both conditions. In summary, our findings indicate that errors in the AC Task are the result of both inhibition failures and voluntary action initiation.
Jakob Heinzle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behaviour a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
European Journal of Neuroscience, 2019Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit stimulus-driven, habitual responses, in favour of complex, voluntary actions. In addition, humans can also alternate between different Tasks. This comes at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the "Task-switch cost." While Task switching and inhibitory control have been studied extensively, the interaction between them has received relatively little attention. Here, we used the SERIA model, a computational model of Antisaccade behaviour, to draw a bridge between them. We investigated Task switching in two versions of the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. SERIA revealed that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists onto the next trial, independently of the upcoming trial type. Moreover, switching between Tasks induces slower and less accurate voluntary responses compared to repeat trials. However, this only occurs when participants lack the time to prepare the correct response. Altogether, SERIA demonstrates that there is a reconfiguration cost associated with switching between voluntary actions. In addition, the enhanced inhibition that follows Antisaccade but not prosaccade trials explains asymmetric switch costs. In conclusion, SERIA offers a novel model of Task switching that unifies previous theoretical accounts by distinguishing between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and could help explain similar phenomena in paradigms beyond the Antisaccade Task.
-
inhibition failures and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of cue delay
Journal of Neurophysiology, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:In this article, we use a computational model to study the mixed Antisaccade Task. We contrast two conditions in which the Task cue is presented either before or concurrently with the saccadic targ...
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and goal directed behavior a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:When instructed to alternate between different Tasks, humans require more time and are less accurate than when they repeat the same Task. This decrease in performance is referred to as the 9Task switch cost9. Several behavioral studies have investigated this phenomenon in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction of a peripheral stimulus. These reports have provided conflicting answers as to whether a cue to saccade away from a target leads to positive, negative, or no switch costs. These contradictory findings are paralleled by two opposing theoretical hypotheses which focus on Task-set inertia and oculomotor inhibition, respectively. Here, we applied a computational, generative model to data from a mixed Antisaccade Task in which the peripheral visual stimulus also served as a trial type cue. Behaviorally, we found reaction time and error rate switch costs on pro- and Antisaccade trials. Modeling revealed that these costs were due to two different effects. First, Antisaccade trials enhanced inhibitory control on the following trial, resulting in fewer but faster inhibition failures. Second, goal-directed actions displayed a Task-inertia effect, in that rule these were slower on switch trials compared to repeat trials. Our results shed light on the general phenomena of Task switching, by demonstrating two types of switch cost that affect differently the inhibition of habitual responses and the initiation of goal-directed actions.
-
Switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behavior: A computational study of the Antisaccade Task
2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:Abstract An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit habitual responses in order to initiate complex, rule-guided actions. Moreover, humans have also the ability to alternate between different sets of rules or Tasks, at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the ‘Task switch cost’. While it is recognized that switching between Tasks requires often to inhibit habitual responses, the interaction between these two forms of cognitive control has been much less studied than each of them separately. Here, we use a computational model to draw a bridge between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and thereby provide a novel account of seemingly paradoxical findings in the Task switch literature. We investigated Task switching in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. Our model demonstrates that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists on the next trial. However, enhanced inhibition affects only the probability of generating habitual responses, and, contrary to previous accounts, cannot be characterized as proactive Task interference. In addition, our model demonstrates that voluntary actions (but not habitual responses) are slower and more prompt to errors on switch trials compared to repeat trials. We conclude that precisely the interaction between these two effects explains a variety of contradictory findings reported in the literature.
-
inhibitory and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of Task design
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Jakob Heinzle, Klaas E. StephanAbstract:In the Antisaccade Task, participants are instructed to saccade in the opposite direction of a peripheral visual cue (PVC). Interestingly, several psychiatric disorders are associated with increased error rates in this paradigm. Despite this observation, there is no consensus about the mechanism behind Antisaccade errors: while often explained as inhibition failures, some studies have suggested that errors are caused by deficits in the ability to initiate voluntary saccades. Using a computational model, we recently showed that under some conditions high latency errors can be explained by a race process between voluntary pro- and Antisaccades. A limitation of our findings is that in our previous experiment the PVC signaled the trial type (pro- or Antisaccade), whereas in most studies, subjects are informed about the trial type before the PVC is presented. We refer to these Task designs as asynchronous (AC) and synchronous cues (SC) conditions. Here, we investigated to which extent differences in design affect the type and frequency of errors in the Antisaccade Task. Twenty-four subjects participated in mixed blocks of pro- and Antisaccade trials in both conditions. Our results demonstrate that Antisaccade error rates were highly correlated across conditions and a non-negligible fraction of them were classified as late errors in both conditions. In summary, our findings indicate that errors in the AC Task are the result of both inhibition failures and voluntary action initiation.
Fabian J. David - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation increases fixational saccades during movement preparation: evidence for impaired preparatory set
Experimental Brain Research, 2019Co-Authors: Lisa C. Goelz, Maya Cottongim, Leonard Verhagen Metman, Daniel M. Corcos, Fabian J. DavidAbstract:People with Parkinson’s disease (PD) exhibit an increase in fixational saccades during the preparatory period prior to target onset in the Antisaccade Task and this increase is related to an increase in prosaccade errors in the Antisaccade Task. It was previously shown that bilateral, but not unilateral, subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS) in people with PD further increases the prosaccade error rate on the Antisaccade Task. We investigated whether bilateral STN DBS also increases the number of fixational saccades in the preparatory period of the Antisaccade Task and if this increase in the number of fixational saccades is related to prosaccade errors. We found that: (1) there were a greater number of fixational saccades during the preparatory period of the Antisaccade Task during bilateral STN DBS compared to no STN DBS ( p
-
Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation increases fixational saccades during movement preparation: evidence for impaired preparatory set.
Experimental brain research, 2019Co-Authors: Lisa C. Goelz, Maya Cottongim, Leonard Verhagen Metman, Daniel M. Corcos, Fabian J. DavidAbstract:People with Parkinson’s disease (PD) exhibit an increase in fixational saccades during the preparatory period prior to target onset in the Antisaccade Task and this increase is related to an increase in prosaccade errors in the Antisaccade Task. It was previously shown that bilateral, but not unilateral, subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS) in people with PD further increases the prosaccade error rate on the Antisaccade Task. We investigated whether bilateral STN DBS also increases the number of fixational saccades in the preparatory period of the Antisaccade Task and if this increase in the number of fixational saccades is related to prosaccade errors. We found that: (1) there were a greater number of fixational saccades during the preparatory period of the Antisaccade Task during bilateral STN DBS compared to no STN DBS (p < 0.001), unilateral STN DBS (p < 0.001), and healthy controls (p = 0.02), and (2) the increase in the number of fixational saccades increased the probability of a prosaccade error for the Antisaccade Task during bilateral STN DBS (p = 0.005). This association between number of fixational saccades and probability of a prosaccade error was similar across no STN DBS, unilateral stimulation, and healthy controls. In addition, we found that the proportion of express prosaccade errors and prosaccade error latency were similar across stimulation conditions. We propose that bilateral STN DBS disrupts the integrated activity of cortico-basal ganglia-collicular processes underlying Antisaccade preparation and that this disruption manifests as an increase in both fixational saccades and prosaccade error rate.
Eduardo A Aponte - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behaviour a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
European Journal of Neuroscience, 2019Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit stimulus-driven, habitual responses, in favour of complex, voluntary actions. In addition, humans can also alternate between different Tasks. This comes at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the "Task-switch cost." While Task switching and inhibitory control have been studied extensively, the interaction between them has received relatively little attention. Here, we used the SERIA model, a computational model of Antisaccade behaviour, to draw a bridge between them. We investigated Task switching in two versions of the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. SERIA revealed that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists onto the next trial, independently of the upcoming trial type. Moreover, switching between Tasks induces slower and less accurate voluntary responses compared to repeat trials. However, this only occurs when participants lack the time to prepare the correct response. Altogether, SERIA demonstrates that there is a reconfiguration cost associated with switching between voluntary actions. In addition, the enhanced inhibition that follows Antisaccade but not prosaccade trials explains asymmetric switch costs. In conclusion, SERIA offers a novel model of Task switching that unifies previous theoretical accounts by distinguishing between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and could help explain similar phenomena in paradigms beyond the Antisaccade Task.
-
inhibition failures and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of cue delay
Journal of Neurophysiology, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:In this article, we use a computational model to study the mixed Antisaccade Task. We contrast two conditions in which the Task cue is presented either before or concurrently with the saccadic targ...
-
switch costs in inhibitory control and goal directed behavior a computational study of the Antisaccade Task
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:When instructed to alternate between different Tasks, humans require more time and are less accurate than when they repeat the same Task. This decrease in performance is referred to as the 9Task switch cost9. Several behavioral studies have investigated this phenomenon in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction of a peripheral stimulus. These reports have provided conflicting answers as to whether a cue to saccade away from a target leads to positive, negative, or no switch costs. These contradictory findings are paralleled by two opposing theoretical hypotheses which focus on Task-set inertia and oculomotor inhibition, respectively. Here, we applied a computational, generative model to data from a mixed Antisaccade Task in which the peripheral visual stimulus also served as a trial type cue. Behaviorally, we found reaction time and error rate switch costs on pro- and Antisaccade trials. Modeling revealed that these costs were due to two different effects. First, Antisaccade trials enhanced inhibitory control on the following trial, resulting in fewer but faster inhibition failures. Second, goal-directed actions displayed a Task-inertia effect, in that rule these were slower on switch trials compared to repeat trials. Our results shed light on the general phenomena of Task switching, by demonstrating two types of switch cost that affect differently the inhibition of habitual responses and the initiation of goal-directed actions.
-
Switch costs in inhibitory control and voluntary behavior: A computational study of the Antisaccade Task
2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Klaas E. Stephan, Jakob HeinzleAbstract:Abstract An integral aspect of human cognition is the ability to inhibit habitual responses in order to initiate complex, rule-guided actions. Moreover, humans have also the ability to alternate between different sets of rules or Tasks, at the cost of degraded performance when compared to repeating the same Task, a phenomenon called the ‘Task switch cost’. While it is recognized that switching between Tasks requires often to inhibit habitual responses, the interaction between these two forms of cognitive control has been much less studied than each of them separately. Here, we use a computational model to draw a bridge between inhibitory control and voluntary action generation and thereby provide a novel account of seemingly paradoxical findings in the Task switch literature. We investigated Task switching in the mixed Antisaccade Task, in which participants are cued to saccade either in the same or in the opposite direction to a peripheral stimulus. Our model demonstrates that stopping a habitual action leads to increased inhibitory control that persists on the next trial. However, enhanced inhibition affects only the probability of generating habitual responses, and, contrary to previous accounts, cannot be characterized as proactive Task interference. In addition, our model demonstrates that voluntary actions (but not habitual responses) are slower and more prompt to errors on switch trials compared to repeat trials. We conclude that precisely the interaction between these two effects explains a variety of contradictory findings reported in the literature.
-
inhibitory and late errors in the Antisaccade Task influence of Task design
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Eduardo A Aponte, Dominic G Tschan, Jakob Heinzle, Klaas E. StephanAbstract:In the Antisaccade Task, participants are instructed to saccade in the opposite direction of a peripheral visual cue (PVC). Interestingly, several psychiatric disorders are associated with increased error rates in this paradigm. Despite this observation, there is no consensus about the mechanism behind Antisaccade errors: while often explained as inhibition failures, some studies have suggested that errors are caused by deficits in the ability to initiate voluntary saccades. Using a computational model, we recently showed that under some conditions high latency errors can be explained by a race process between voluntary pro- and Antisaccades. A limitation of our findings is that in our previous experiment the PVC signaled the trial type (pro- or Antisaccade), whereas in most studies, subjects are informed about the trial type before the PVC is presented. We refer to these Task designs as asynchronous (AC) and synchronous cues (SC) conditions. Here, we investigated to which extent differences in design affect the type and frequency of errors in the Antisaccade Task. Twenty-four subjects participated in mixed blocks of pro- and Antisaccade trials in both conditions. Our results demonstrate that Antisaccade error rates were highly correlated across conditions and a non-negligible fraction of them were classified as late errors in both conditions. In summary, our findings indicate that errors in the AC Task are the result of both inhibition failures and voluntary action initiation.