Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28185228›Full record

ReviewAttention, perception & psychophysics2017

Failures of cognitive control or attention? The case of stop-signal deficits in schizophrenia.

Dora Matzke, Matthew Hughes, Johanna C Badcock, Patricia Michie, Andrew Heathcote

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Model-based analysis of stop-signal data reveals robust neural and clinical correlates of evidence accumulation but not inhibition.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Troubleshooting Bayesian cognitive models.Psychological methods · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

Dora MatzkeDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Postbus 15906, 1001 NK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. d.matzke@uva.nl.
Matthew HughesBrain and Psychological Sciences Centre, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia.
Johanna C BadcockCentre for Clinical Research in Neuropsychiatry, School of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Patricia MichieSchool of Psychology and Centre for Brain and Mental Health Research, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Andrew HeathcoteSchool of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.

Funding

EPA EP-C-15-010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used Bayesian cognitive modelling to identify the underlying causes of apparent inhibitory deficits in the stop-signal paradigm. The analysis was applied to stop-signal data reported by Badcock et al. (Psychological Medicine 32: 87-297, 2002) and Hughes et al. (Biological Psychology 89: 220-231, 2012), where schizophrenia patients and control participants made rapid choice responses, but on some trials were signalled to stop their ongoing response. Previous research has assumed an inhibitory deficit in schizophrenia, because estimates of the mean time taken to react to the stop signal are longer in patients than controls. We showed that these longer estimates are partly due to failing to react to the stop signal ("trigger failures") and partly due to a slower initiation of inhibition, implicating a failure of attention rather than a deficit in the inhibitory process itself. Correlations between the probability of trigger failures and event-related potentials reported by Hughes et al. are interpreted as supporting the attentional account of inhibitory deficits. Our results, and those of Matzke et al. (2016), who report that controls also display a substantial although lower trigger-failure rate, indicate that attentional factors need to be taken into account when interpreting results from the stop-signal paradigm.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalSchizophrenic PsychologyAdultAttentionBayes TheoremChoice BehaviorCognitionEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeSchizophreniaAttention deficitsInhibition deficitsSchizophreniaStop-signal paradigmTrigger failure

Identifiers

PMID28185228
PMCPMC5413535

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.