ArticleBrain sciences2023
Electrophysiological Correlates of Different Proactive Controls during Response Competition and Inhibition Tasks.
Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct neural representational changes following cross-format number tutoring in children with mathematical difficulties.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Cognitive trajectories in longitudinally trained 3xTg-AD mice.Physiology & behavior · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aims to investigate the behavioral outcomes and the antecedent brain dynamics during the preparation of tasks in which the discrimination is either about the choice (choice response task; CRT) or the action (Go/No-go), and in a task not requiring discrimination (simple response task; SRT). Using event-related potentials (ERPs), the mean amplitude over prefrontal, central, and parietal-occipital sites was analyzed in 20 young healthy participants in a time frame before stimulus presentation to assess cognitive, motor, and visual readiness, respectively. Behaviorally, participants were faster and more accurate in the SRT than in the CRT and the Go/No-go. At the electrophysiological level, the proactive cognitive and motor ERP components were larger in the CRT and the Go/No-go than the SRT, but the largest amplitude emerged in the Go/No-go. Further, the amplitude over parieto-occipital leads was enhanced in the SRT. The strongest intensity of the frontal negative expectancy wave over prefrontal leads in the Go/No-go task could be attributed to the largest uncertainty about the target presentation and subsequent motor response selection and execution. The enhanced sensory readiness in the SRT can be related to either an increased visual readiness associated with task requirements or a reduced overlap with proactive processing on the scalp.
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.