This experiment will utilize electroencephalography (EEG) and electromyography (EMG) to compare and contrast infrequent events with different action requirements: those requiring stopping a prepotent response (as in the stop signal in the stop-signal task) and those requiring responding despite the occurrence of visually analogous infrequent event (a continue signal). This experiment seeks to complement a related, pre-registered experiment involving the same basic task with TMS in which participants made foot responses. At n=20 (of targeted sample size of 27), motor-evoked potential (MEP) acquired from the hand was commonly suppressed after both continue and stop signals demonstrating global motor suppression. Moreover, successful stops showed pronounced motor suppression which was most apparent at later TMS stimulation times (whereas failed stop and continue motor suppression become less pronounced at 200 ms stimulation time). Importantly, continue and stop signals were equally infrequent (p = .167) and occurred with the same stop signal delay (continue signal latency was yoked to an adaptive stop signal delay) thus differing only with respect to their motor demands. This finding also suggests motor inhibition can be implemented by two phases: (1) an early saliency-driven initial pause phase (MEP reduction in all continue and stop trials) and (2) a later cancellation phase (robustly maintained MEP reduction in successful stops compared to failed stops and continue trials). In this experiment, we will simultaneously record extracranial EEG as well as EMG from both hands while participants perform the same task with hand responses. By using this experimental design, we aim to compare and contrast continue and stop conditions using other techniques that offer precise temporal resolution throughout the entirety of each trial (i.e., not just three time points). First, using multivariate pattern analysis with EEG data, we predict that the classifier will initially not be able to decode successful stops from successful continues, but will be able to at later time courses. Second, using EMG (this time recorded from task-related effectors), we aim to replicate others who looked at subthreshold activity and showed that successful stopping was characterized by an initial increase in activity followed by a rapid decrease (e.g. Jana et al., 2020; Raud & Huster, 2017; Raud et al., 2020). Crucially, however, we will extend this work by further considering whether this EMG signature of action cancellation is also present after continue signals followed by an additional rebound in EMG activity consistent with a response. Also, as failed stops also involve the infrequent stop signal but with responses--and typically early ones--we predict that a short duration decrease in ongoing response-related EMG activity may also be evident.