ArticlePeerJ2022
Improved response inhibition induced by attentional capture is associated with physical activity.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability to stop a response promptly when a stop signal is presented is named response inhibition. It is generally accepted that the process of response inhibition requires a subject to pay attention to the stop instruction and then cancel the action. A wealth of converging evidence suggests that physical activity (PA) can promote response inhibition, but the potential contributions of attentional capture to the relationship between PA and response inhibition are currently unknown. In this study, the standard stop-signal task (SST) and two novel versions of the SST were used to solve this gap. A total of 58 college students were divided into a higher PA group and a lower PA group, respectively. In Experiment 1, the classical SST determined that the participants in the higher PA group displayed a significantly faster stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) than those in the lower PA group. Experiment 2 separated the attentional capture in the SST and revealed that the participants in the higher PA group could detect the signal faster than those in the lower PA group. Experiment 3 further added a stop signal to Experiment 2 and demonstrated that the participants in the higher PA group could more effectively deploy attentional resources to complete the task. Overall, these findings indicate that PA is positively associated with response inhibition and that the positive relationship is associated with effective allocation of attentional resources for faster attentional capture.
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.