Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30659867›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology2021

Common neural processes during action-stopping and infrequent stimulus detection: The frontocentral P3 as an index of generic motor inhibition.

Darcy A Waller, Eliot Hazeltine, Jan R Wessel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 2021. 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. Article
  2. Common and Unique Neurophysiological Processes That Support the Stopping and Revising of Actions.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Does the stop-signal P3 reflect inhibitory control?Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2025
    Review
  4. Biophysical Modeling of Frontocentral ERP Generation Links Circuit-Level Mechanisms of Action-Stopping to a Behavioral Race Model.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

3 authors.

Darcy A WallerDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America. Electronic address: darcy-waller@uiowa.edu.
Eliot HazeltineDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America.
Jan R WesselDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America; Department of Neurology, University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States of America. Electronic address: jan-wessel@uiowa.edu.

Funding

The Role of a Neural Mechanism for Inhibitory Control in Cognitive FlexibilityR01NS102201 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI WESSEL, JAN R · 2018 to 2022
$1.9M
Mechanisms of Health and Disease at the Behavioral-Biomedical InterfaceT32GM108540 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI LUTGENDORF, SUSAN K, VOSS, MICHELLE WEBB · 2014 to 2023
$1.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM108540NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS102201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The stop-signal task (SST) is used to study action-stopping in the laboratory. In SSTs, the P3 event-related potential following stop-signals is considered to be a neural index of motor inhibition. However, a similar P3 deflection is often observed following infrequent events in non-inhibition tasks. Moreover, within SSTs, stop-signals are indeed infrequent events, presenting a systematic confound that hampers the interpretation of the stop-signal P3 (and other candidate neural indices of motor inhibition). Therefore, we performed two studies to test whether the stop-signal P3 is uniquely related to motor inhibition or reflects infrequency detection. In Study 1, participants completed the SST and a visually identical change-detection task requiring the detection of a task-relevant, frequent signal (but not motor inhibition). We observed a P3 associated with motor inhibition in the SST, but no such positivity in the change-detection task. In Study 2, we modified the change-detection task. Some task-relevant events were now infrequent, matching the frequency of stop-signals in the SST. These events indeed evoked a P3, though of smaller amplitude than the P3 in the SST. Independent component analysis suggested that stop-signal P3 and infrequency-P3 ERPs were non-independent and shared a common neural generator. Further analyses suggested that this common neural process likely reflects motor inhibition in both tasks: infrequent events in the change-detection task lead to a non-instructed, incidental slowing of motor responding, the degree of which was strongly correlated with P3 amplitude. These results have wide-reaching implications for the interpretation of neural signals in both stop-signal and infrequency/oddball-tasks.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyInhibition, PsychologicalEvent-Related Potentials, P300Evoked PotentialsHumansReaction TimeAction-stoppingEvent-related potentialsFrontocentral P3Infrequency detectionMotor inhibition

Identifiers

PMID30659867
PMCPMC6640083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.