ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
Neural evidence of task efficacy affecting cognitive control in test-anxious individuals.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies have found cognitive control deficits in high test anxiety (HTA) individuals, yet the underlying mechanisms remain incompletely understood. Guided by the Expected Value of Control (EVC) model, this study used a mixed factorial design to examine how task efficacy influences cognitive control in individuals with HTA. We utilized event-related potentials (ERPs) in a cued Flanker task, manipulating the evaluative threat context and task difficulty. Behavioral results showed that in threat contexts, HTA individuals exhibited longer reaction times in the Flanker task and lower accuracy in high-conflict conditions compared to low test anxiety (LTA) individuals. The results of ERP showed that during cue processing, HTA individuals exhibited exaggerated contingent negative variation (CNV) amplitudes across all difficulty cues in nonthreat contexts, suggesting excessive preparatory activity and resource allocation. However, in threat contexts, CNV amplitudes were significantly reduced, reflecting inadequate cognitive resource mobilization. During cognitive control processing, HTA individuals exhibited more negative N2 amplitudes in high-conflict conditions in nonthreat contexts, suggesting enhanced cognitive control. In contrast, in threat contexts, their N2 amplitudes were significantly more positive than those of LTA individuals, indicating impaired cognitive control. The study found that HTA individuals overinvested cognitive resources in nonthreat contexts but reduced investment in threat contexts, possibly due to lower perceptions of efficacy, which may have impaired cognitive control. This research extended the application of the EVC model, provided new theoretical insights into the mechanisms of cognitive control deficits in test anxiety, and informed targeted interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40696228What 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.