Fictitious Inhibitory Differences

The stop-signal paradigm is a popular method for examining response inhibition and impulse control in psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and clinical domains because it allows the estimation of the covert latency of the stop process: the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT). In three sets of simulations, we examined to what extent SSRTs that were estimated with the popular mean and integration methods were influenced by the skew of the reaction time distribution and the gradual slowing of the response latencies. We found that the mean method consistently overestimated SSRT. The integration method tended to underestimate SSRT when response latencies gradually increased. This underestimation bias was absent when SSRTs were estimated with the integration method for smaller blocks of trials. Thus, skewing and response slowing can lead to spurious inhibitory differences. We recommend that the mean method of estimating SSRT be abandoned in favor of the integration method.

[1]  G. Mandler,et al.  Retrieval processes in recognition , 1974, Memory & cognition.

[2]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Retrieval Processes in Recognition Memory , 1976 .

[3]  R. Ratcliff.  Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  G. Logan.  On the ability to inhibit thought and action , 1984 .

[5]  G. Logan,et al.  Impulsivity and Inhibitory Control in Normal Development and Childhood Psychopathology , 1990 .

[6]  R. Ratcliff.  Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  T. Carr,et al.  Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory and Language , 1994 .

[8]  G. Logan,et al.  Impulsivity and Inhibitory Control , 1997 .

[9]  Jaap Oosterlaan,et al.  Response inhibition and response re-engagement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, disruptive, anxious and normal children , 1998, Behavioural Brain Research.

[10]  G. Logan,et al.  Development of inhibitory control across the life span. , 1999, Developmental psychology.

[11]  K. R. Ridderinkhof,et al.  A study of adaptive behavior: effects of age and irrelevant information on the ability to inhibit one's actions , 1999 .

[12]  C Leth-Steensen,et al.  Mean response times, variability, and skew in the responding of ADHD children: a response time distributional approach. , 2000, Acta psychologica.

[13]  Gordon D Logan,et al.  Horse-race model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. , 2003, Acta psychologica.

[14]  A. Vandierendonck,et al.  The interaction between stop signal inhibition and distractor interference in the flanker and Stroop task. , 2004, Acta psychologica.

[15]  J. Kenemans,et al.  A meta-analytic review of stopping performance in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: deficient inhibitory motor control? , 2005, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[16]  Christoph Klein,et al.  Intra-Subject Variability in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder , 2006, Biological Psychiatry.

[17]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  Frederick Verbruggen,et al.  Short-term aftereffects of response inhibition: repetition priming or between-trial control adjustments? , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  Frederick Verbruggen,et al.  STOP-IT: Windows executable software for the stop-signal paradigm , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[20]  G. Logan,et al.  Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[21]  M. Bellgrove,et al.  Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience , 2009, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[22]  G. Logan,et al.  Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms , 2009, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[23]  G. Logan,et al.  Proactive adjustments of response strategies in the stop-signal paradigm. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[24]  L. Leotti,et al.  Motivational influences on response inhibition , 2009 .

[25]  Frederick Verbruggen,et al.  Responding with Restraint: What Are the Neurocognitive Mechanisms? , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  T. Wager,et al.  Motivational influences on response inhibition measures. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  Patrick G. Bissett,et al.  Balancing Cognitive Demands: Control Adjustments in the Stop-signal Paradigm Stop-signal Paradigm Post-stop-signal Slowing , 2011 .

[28]  Joshua M. Langberg,et al.  Evidence for higher reaction time variability for children with ADHD on a range of cognitive tasks including reward and event rate manipulations. , 2011, Neuropsychology.

[29]  A. Aron.  From Reactive to Proactive and Selective Control: Developing a Richer Model for Stopping Inappropriate Responses , 2011, Biological Psychiatry.

[30]  C. N. Boehler,et al.  The influence of different Stop-signal response time estimation procedures on behavior–behavior and brain–behavior correlations , 2012, Behavioural Brain Research.

[31]  Eliza Congdon,et al.  Measurement and Reliability of Response Inhibition , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[32]  M. Vink,et al.  Expectations and violations: Delineating the neural network of proactive inhibitory control , 2013, Human brain mapping.

[33]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .