ArticleScientific reports2023
Interval timing relative to response inhibition in the differential reinforcement of low-rate responding in normally developing young adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Role of the Serotonergic System in Time Perception: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Time Perception Test in IntelliCage System for Preclinical Study: Linking Depression and Serotonergic Modulation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The neuropharmacological profile of interval responding during operant tasks.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With recent proposal suggesting the multifaceted nature of impulsivity, researchers have been intrigued by the question of whether the impulsive behaviour measured in the traditionally psychological paradigms is unitary. One such paradigm, the differential reinforcement of low-rate responding (DRL), has been used to assess response inhibition, but its underlying mechanism has still been debated. In present research, we examined and differentiated the effects of both response inhibition and interval timing on a multisession DRL-10 s (DRL-10 s) in a large sample of normally developing young adults, as well as with three other measures including the stop-signal reaction task (SSRT), time production task-10 s (TPT-10 s), and the Barrett impulsivity scale-11 (BIS-11). The results showed that behavioural changes existed in DRL. As the task sessions progressed, there was an increase in both reinforcement probability and peak time, but a decrease in burst responses. Most importantly, both principal component analysis and generalized multilevel modeling yielded consistent results that as the task progressed, there was an increasing involvement of the TPT in the late sessions of DRL. However, none of the effect of SSRT was found. In sum, the differential degrees of involvement of the timing process, relative to response inhibition, were observed in DRL.
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.