The Go-NoGo task was well performed. Mean reaction time on Go responses was 338.4 ms (60.4). There were 0.9 (2.1) misses and 2.2 (1.9) incorrect responses. Grand-averaged ERP waveforms are presented in Figure 1 (overlaid over the time-frequency plots). It should be noticed here that ERP results were reported earlier in Anokhin et al. (2004) and will not be described here. Consistent with previous report [34], there is a striking difference between response to Go and NoGo stimuli. First, in the NoGo condition, there is a prominent frontal N2 component, which is virtually absent in the Go condition. Second, in the NoGo condition, the P3 peak is shifted toward anterior (fronto-central) area relative to Go condition in which P3 component peaks in the parietal region similar to a classical oddball paradigm. Finally, P3 latency is increased in the NoGo compared with Go condition. This “anteriorization” and slowing of P3 has been described in previous studies with this paradigm [34], [35].
