↓ Skip to main content

Neural correlates of intentional and stimulus-driven inhibition: a comparison

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neural correlates of intentional and stimulus-driven inhibition: a comparison
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margot A. Schel, Simone Kühn, Marcel Brass, Patrick Haggard, K. Richard Ridderinkhof, Eveline A. Crone

Abstract

People can inhibit an action because of an instruction by an external stimulus, or because of their own internal decision. The similarities and differences between these two forms of inhibition are not well understood. Therefore, in the present study the neural correlates of intentional and stimulus-driven inhibition were tested in the same subjects. Participants performed two inhibition tasks while lying in the scanner: the marble task in which they had to choose for themselves between intentionally acting on, or inhibiting a prepotent response to measure intentional inhibition, and the classical stop signal task in which an external signal triggered the inhibition process. Results showed that intentional inhibition decision processes rely on a neural network that has been documented extensively for stimulus-driven inhibition, including bilateral parietal and lateral prefrontal cortex and pre-supplementary motor area. We also found activation in dorsal frontomedian cortex and left inferior frontal gyrus during intentional inhibition that depended on the history of previous choices. Together, these results indicate that intentional inhibition and stimulus-driven inhibition engage a common inhibition network, but intentional inhibition is also characterized by additional context-dependent neural activation in medial prefrontal cortex.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 1%
Italy 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 28%
Researcher 30 19%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Student > Master 14 9%
Professor 6 4%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 19 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 62 39%
Neuroscience 31 20%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 3%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 29 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 June 2015.
All research outputs
#13,328,150
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,982
of 7,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,369
of 305,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#68
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 305,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.