Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37008850›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Reward prospect affects strategic adjustments in stop signal task.

Valentina Giuffrida, Isabel Beatrice Marc, Surabhi Ramawat, Roberto Fontana, Lorenzo Fiori, Giampiero Bardella, Sabrina Fagioli, Stefano Ferraina, Emiliano Brunamonti, Pierpaolo Pani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Value-Directed Remembering: A Dual-Process Perspective.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

10 authors.

Valentina GiuffridaDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Isabel Beatrice MarcDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Surabhi RamawatDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Roberto FontanaDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Lorenzo FioriDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Giampiero BardellaDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Sabrina FagioliDepartment of Education, University of Roma Tre, Rome, Italy.
Stefano FerrainaDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Emiliano BrunamontiDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Pierpaolo PaniDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interaction with the environment requires us to predict the potential reward that will follow our choices. Rewards could change depending on the context and our behavior adapts accordingly. Previous studies have shown that, depending on reward regimes, actions can be facilitated (i.e., increasing the reward for response) or interfered (i.e., increasing the reward for suppression). Here we studied how the change in reward perspective can influence subjects' adaptation strategy. Students were asked to perform a modified version of the Stop-Signal task. Specifically, at the beginning of each trial, a Cue Signal informed subjects of the value of the reward they would receive; in one condition, Go Trials were rewarded more than Stop Trials, in another, Stop Trials were rewarded more than Go Trials, and in the last, both trials were rewarded equally. Subjects participated in a virtual competition, and the reward consisted of points to be earned to climb the leaderboard and win (as in a video game contest). The sum of points earned was updated with each trial. After a learning phase in which the three conditions were presented separately, each subject performed 600 trials testing phase in which the three conditions were randomly mixed. Based on the previous studies, we hypothesized that subjects could employ different strategies to perform the task, including modulating inhibition efficiency, adjusting response speed, or employing a constant behavior across contexts. We found that to perform the task, subjects preferentially employed a strategy-related speed of response adjustment, while the duration of the inhibition process did not change significantly across the conditions. The investigation of strategic motor adjustments to reward's prospect is relevant not only to understanding how action control is typically regulated, but also to work on various groups of patients who exhibit cognitive control deficits, suggesting that the ability to inhibit can be modulated by employing reward prospects as motivational factors.

Indexed as

cognitive controlinhibitory controlmotor controlrewardstop signal taskstrategic adjustments

Identifiers

PMID37008850
PMCPMC10064060

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.