Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23471118›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2013

The impact of induced anxiety on response inhibition.

Oliver J Robinson, Marissa Krimsky, Christian Grillon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. The Organization of Anxiety Symptoms Along the Threat Imminence Continuum.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The Posterior Cingulate Cortex Reflects the Impact of Anxiety on Drift Rates During Cognitive Processing.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Impact of active and latent concerns about COVID-19 on attention.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Do concerns about COVID-19 impair sustained attention?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Oliver J RobinsonSection on the Neurobiology of Fear and Anxiety, National Institute of Mental Health Bethesda, MD, USA.
Marissa Krimsky
Christian Grillon
National Institute of Mental Health · US

Funding

The Psychophysiology Of Fear And AnxietyZIAMH002798 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI GRILLON, CHRISTIAN · 2009 to 2022
$29.0M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anxiety has wide reaching effects on cognition; evidenced most prominently by the "difficulties concentrating" seen in anxiety disorders, and by adaptive harm-avoidant behaviors adopted under threatening circumstances. Despite having critical implications for daily-living, the precise impact of anxiety on cognition is as yet poorly quantified. Here we attempt to clarify the impact of anxiety on sustained attention and response inhibition via a translational anxiety induction in healthy individuals (N = 22). Specifically, in a within-subjects design, participants completed the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) in which subjects withhold responses to infrequent no-go stimuli under threat of unpredictable electrical shock (anxious) and safe (non-anxious) conditions. Different studies have argued that this task measures either (1) attention lapses due to off-task thinking or (2) response inhibition; two cognitive functions which are likely impacted by anxiety. We show that threat of shock significantly reduces errors of commission on the no-go trials relative to the safe condition whilst having no effect on go trials or overall reaction time (RT). We suggest that this is because threat of shock during SART promotes response inhibition. In particular we argue that, by virtue of frequency, subjects acquire a habitual bias toward a go response which impairs no-go performance and that threat of shock improves the ability to withhold these prepotent responses. This improved response inhibition likely falls within the range of adaptive cognitive functions which promote cautious harm avoidance under threatening conditions, although a range of alternative explanations for this effect is discussed.

Indexed as

anxietymind-wanderingresponse inhibitionthreatthreat of shock

Identifiers

PMID23471118
PMCPMC3590569
OpenAlexW2170761854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.