Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30016467›Full record

Trial reportThe international journal of neuropsychopharmacology2018

Catecholaminergic Modulation of Conflict Control Depends on the Source of Conflicts.

Wiebke Bensmann, Veit Roessner, Ann-Kathrin Stock, Christian Beste

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Neurobiological influences on event perception: the role of catecholamines.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Learning Experience Reverses Catecholaminergic Effects on Adaptive Behavior.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2020
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. The Downsides of Cognitive Enhancement.The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry · 2021
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wiebke BensmannCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany.
Veit RoessnerCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany.
Ann-Kathrin StockCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany.
Christian BesteCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany.
TU Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: To display goal-directed behavior, we must be able to resolve response conflicts that arise from processing various distractors. Such conflicts may be triggered by different kinds of distractor stimuli (e.g., priming and flanker stimuli), but it has remained largely unclear whether the functional and neurobiological underpinnings of both conflict types differ. We therefore investigated the functional relevance of the catecholamines dopamine and norepinephrine, which have been shown to increase the signal-to-noise ratio in neuronal processing and should therefore modulate response conflicts. Methods: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study design, we examined the effect of methylphenidate (0.5 mg/kg) on both flanker-induced and priming-induced response conflicts in a group of n=25 healthy young adults. We used EEG recordings to examine event-related potentials in combination with source localization analyses to identify the cognitive-neurophysiological subprocesses and functional neuroanatomical structures modulated by methylphenidate. Results: Compared with placebo, methylphenidate decreased flanker conflicts. This was matched by increased congruency effects in the fronto-central N2/P3 event-related potential complex and associated with modulations in the right inferior frontal gyrus. In contrast to this, methylphenidate did not modulate the size of prime-evoked conflicts. Conclusions: Our results suggest that catecholamine-driven increases in signal-to-noise ratio and neural gain control do not equally benefit differently evoked conflicts. This supports the hypothesis of an at least partly different neurobiological basis for flanker- and prime-evoked response conflicts. As the right inferior frontal gyrus plays an important role in inhibition, the catecholaminergic system may reduce flanker conflicts by supporting the inhibition of distracting information.

Indexed as

Conflict, PsychologicalAdultDouble-Blind MethodEvoked PotentialsFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMethylphenidatePrefrontal CortexYoung AdultMethylphenidate

Identifiers

PMID30016467
PMCPMC6165959
OpenAlexW2883566139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.