ArticleDevelopmental cognitive neuroscience2018
Differences in response inhibition processes between adolescents and adults are modulated by sensory processes.
Article in Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pupil Reactions to Tactile Stimulation: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Pooled it
- Cognitive science theory-driven pharmacology elucidates the neurobiological basis of perception-motor integration.Communications biology · 2022Trial
- Effect of vibrostimulatory wearable technology on stereotyped behaviour in a child with autism and intellectual disability.BMJ case reports · 2022Article
- Neurobehavioral maturation of motor response inhibition in adolescence - A narrative review.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2022Review
- Neurophysiological correlates of perception-action binding in the somatosensory system.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Compensation of Trial-to-Trial Latency Jitter Reveals the Parietal Retrieval Success Effect to be Both Variable and Thresholded in Older Adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2020
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Response inhibition processes undergo strong developmental changes. The same is true for sensory processes, and recent evidence shows that there also within-modality differences in the efficacy to trigger motor response inhibition. Yet, modulatory effects of within-modality differences during age-related changes in response inhibition between adolescence and adulthood are still indeterminate. We investigated this question in a system neurophysiological approach combining analysis of event-related potentials (ERPs) with temporal EEG signal decomposition and source localization processes. We used the somatosensory system to examine possible within-modality differences. The study shows that differences in response inhibition processes between adolescents and adults are modulated by sensory processes. Adolescents show deficient response inhibition when stimuli triggering these mechanisms are processed via SI somatosensory areas, compared to SII somatosensory areas. Opposed to this, no differences between adolescents and adults are evident, when response inhibition processes are triggered via SII cortical regions. The EEG data suggests that specific neurophysiological subprocesses are associated with this. Adolescents seem to encounter problems assigning processing resources to integrate motor with tactile information in posterior parietal areas when this information is processed via SI. Thus, basic perceptual and age-related processes interactively modulate response inhibition as an important instance of cognitive control.
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.