Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31997253›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2020

Measuring response inhibition with a continuous inhibitory-control task.

Christina Meier, Stephen E G Lea, Ian P L McLaren

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christina MeierUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK. meierchristina@aol.com.
Stephen E G LeaUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Ian P L McLarenUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
University of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inhibitory control enables subjects to quickly react to unexpected changes in external demands. In humans, this kind of behavioral flexibility is often used as an indicator of an individual's executive functions, and more and more research has emerged to investigate this link in nonhuman animals as well. Here we explored the value of a recently developed continuous inhibitory-control task in assessing inhibitory-control capacities in animals. Pigeons completed a response-inhibition task that required them to adjust their movement in space in pursuit of a reward across changing target locations. Inhibition was measured in terms of movement trajectory (path taken toward the correct location for trials in which the target location did and did not change) and velocity (both before and after correcting the trajectory toward the changed location). Although the observed velocities did not follow any of our predictions in a clear way, the pigeons' movement trajectories did prove to be a good indicator of inhibitory control, showing that pigeons, though limited in their capacities relative to the sophisticated control strategies expressed by humans, are capable of exerting some forms of inhibitory control. These results strengthen the role of this paradigm as a valuable tool for evaluating inhibitory-control abilities across the animal kingdom.

Indexed as

ColumbidaeExecutive FunctionAnimalsHumansInhibition, PsychologicalRewardInhibitionInhibitory controlPigeonResponse inhibition

Identifiers

PMID31997253
OpenAlexW3004029551

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.