ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
Test-retest reliability and repeatability of behavioral and electrophysiological markers of cognitive control in an Eriksen Flanker Task.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How much habituation is enough? An R application for ad hoc content-related limits of acceptance in behavioral research.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive control processes, specifically interference control and error monitoring, are often impaired across neuropsychiatric disorders and have been proposed as transdiagnostic markers of psychopathology and important treatment targets. Accurately probing them, however, requires understanding the psychometric properties of the measures used to assess cognitive control, including their intra- and interindividual stability over time. Using an Eriksen Flanker Task, we tested behavioral and electrophysiological readouts of cognitive control in 36 healthy individuals (26 females, 10 males; mean age ± standard deviation = 33.18 ± 14.49, range = 19-68) and evaluated their test-retest reliability across 48 hours by calculating Spearman correlations and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients to assess group-level stability. Moreover, we assessed repeatability through Coefficients of Variation and Bland-Altman statistics to investigate the degree of change in participants' absolute scores. We found moderate-to-excellent test-retest reliability for most cognitive control measures, with condition-specific metrics generally being more reliable than difference scores. Regarding repeatability, we observed considerable intraindividual variability in absolute scores over time, which differed widely between participants. These results demonstrate that measurements of cognitive control may display substantial intraindividual variability across sessions despite demonstrating high test-retest reliability and vice versa. Our findings expand the current literature by providing novel information about the stability of behavioral and physiological markers of cognitive control over time. Moreover, they may have important implications for the application and evaluation of clinical interventions by highlighting the usefulness of considering repeatability measures in addition to the more commonly reported test-retest reliability metrics, when tracking changes over time in clinically relevant processes within single individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40790001What 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.