Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28751739›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Distinct brain responses to different inhibitions: Evidence from a modified Flanker Task.

Liufang Xie, Maofan Ren, Bihua Cao, Fuhong Li

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Liufang XieSchool of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China.
Maofan RenSchool of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China.
Bihua CaoSchool of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China.
Fuhong LiSchool of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang, 330022, China. lifuhong@jxnu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whether inhibition is a unitary or multifaceted construct is still an open question. To clarify the electrophysiological distinction among the different types of inhibition, we used a modified flanker paradigm, in which interference inhibition, rule inhibition, and response inhibition were compared to non-inhibition condition. The results indicated that, compared to the non-inhibition condition (1) the interference inhibition condition induced larger negativities during N2 epoch at the frontal region, (2) the rule inhibition condition elicited a larger N1 at the posterior region, followed by a larger P3a at the frontal region, reflecting the function of proactive cognitive control in the new stimulus-reaction (S-R) association, and (3) the response inhibition condition evoked a larger P3b at the posterior region, reflecting the process of suppressing the old response and reprogramming the new action. These findings provide new evidence that distinct neural mechanisms underlie different types of inhibition.

Indexed as

Event-Related Potentials, P300Inhibition, PsychologicalAdolescentBrainFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28751739
PMCPMC5532368

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.