↓ Skip to main content

Associatively mediated stopping: Training stimulus-specific inhibitory control

Overview of attention for article published in Learning & Behavior, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Associatively mediated stopping: Training stimulus-specific inhibitory control
Published in
Learning & Behavior, September 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13420-015-0196-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

William A. Bowditch, Frederick Verbruggen, Ian P. L. McLaren

Abstract

Response inhibition is often considered to be a deliberate act of cognitive control. However, our and other research suggests that when stimuli are repeatedly paired with an inhibitory response, inhibition can become automatized. Currently, relatively little research has focused on the nature of the associative structure that underpins stimulus-specific inhibitory training. In this study, we investigated what associations can be learned in stop-signal training tasks, distinguishing between indirect priming of the stop signal and direct activation of a stop response. We employed a novel paradigm, in which colored cues were stochastically paired with a number of stop signals, and demonstrated that cues consistently paired with stopping reduced commission errors and slowed reaction times. Furthermore, we showed that manipulating the pairings between stimuli and stop signals in a manner that favored the formation of stimulus-stop associations produced enhanced stop learning effects on reaction times, but not on probabilities of responding. Our results suggest that the perceptual processes supporting signal detection (priming) as well as inhibitory processes are involved in inhibitory control training, and that inhibition training may benefit from reducing the contingency between stimuli and stop signals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 38 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 29%
Student > Bachelor 9 22%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 51%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Mathematics 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2016.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Learning & Behavior
#790
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,145
of 286,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning & Behavior
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.