Trial reportAttention, perception & psychophysics2014
Response inhibition during perceptual decision making in humans and macaques.
Trial report in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning Decouples Accuracy and Reaction Time for Rapid Decisions in a Transitive Inference Task.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- The Difficulty in Numerical Computation Impacts Motor Decisions in a Stop-Signal Task.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Inhibitory control tests in non-human animals: validity, reliability, and perspectives.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Review
- How Do Common Marmosets Maintain the Balance Between Response Execution and Action Inhibition?American journal of primatology · 2025Article
- Force monitoring reveals single trial dynamics of motor control in a stop signal task.Physiological reports · 2024Article
- Distinct roles of dorsal and ventral subthalamic neurons in action selection and cancellation.Neuron · 2021Article
- Influence of the Location of a Decision Cue on the Dynamics of Pupillary Light Response.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Countermanding Perceptual Decision-Making.iScience · 2020Article
- Accumulators, Neurons, and Response Time.Trends in neurosciences · 2019Review
- Comparative psychometrics: establishing what differs is central to understanding what evolves.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018Review
- Time-varying decision boundaries: insights from optimality analysis.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2018Review
- A stop-signal task for sheep: introduction and validation of a direct measure for the stop-signal reaction time.Animal cognition · 2017Article
- Models of inhibitory control.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Go-activation endures following the presentation of a stop-signal: evidence from startle.Journal of neurophysiology · 2017Article
- Article
- Comparing fixed and collapsing boundary versions of the diffusion model.Journal of mathematical psychology · 2016Article
- Inhibitory control in mind and brain 2.0: blocked-input models of saccadic countermanding.Psychological review · 2015Article
- Revisiting the evidence for collapsing boundaries and urgency signals in perceptual decision-making.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015Article
- The point of no return: A fundamental limit on the ability to control thought and action.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Response inhibition in stop signal tasks has been explained as the outcome of a race between GO and STOP processes (e.g., Logan, 1981). Response choice in two-alternative perceptual categorization tasks has been explained as the outcome of an accumulation of evidence for the alternative responses. To begin unifying these two powerful investigation frameworks, we obtained data from humans and macaque monkeys performing a stop signal task with responses guided by perceptual categorization and variable degrees of difficulty, ranging from low to high accuracy. Comparable results across species reinforced the validity of this animal model. Response times and errors increased with categorization difficulty. The probability of failing to inhibit responses on stop signal trials increased with stop signal delay, and the response times for failed stop signal trials were shorter than those for trials with no stop signal. Thus, the Logan race model could be applied to estimate the duration of the stopping process. We found that the duration of the STOP process did not vary across a wide range of discrimination accuracies. This is consistent with the functional, and possibly mechanistic, independence of choice and inhibition mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.