Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 252

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Regional brain activity when selecting a response despite interference: An H215O PET study of the stroop and an emotional stroop

George, M. S., Ketter, T. A., Parekh, P. I., Rosinsky, N., Ring, H., Casey, B. J., Trimble, M. R., Horwitz, B., Herscovitch, P., Post, R. M.·1994·Human Brain Mapping
DOI 10.1002/hbm.460010305
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Stroop interference test requires a person to respond to specific elements of a stimulus while suppressing a competing response. Previous positron emission tomography (PET) work has shown increased activity in the right anterior cingulate gyrus during the Stroop test. It is unclear, however, whether the anterior cingulate participates more in the attentional rather than the response selection aspects of the task or whether different interference stimuli might activate different brain regions. We sought to determine (1) whether the Stroop interference task causes increased activation in the right anterior cingulate as previously reported, (2) whether this activation varied as a function of response time, (3) what brain regions were functionally linked to the cingulate during performance of the Stroop, and (4) whether a modified Stroop task involving emotionally distracting words would activate the cingulate and other limbic and paralimbic regions. Twenty‐one healthy volunteers were scanned with H 215 O PET while they performed the Stroop interference test (standard Stroop), a modified Stroop task using distracting words with sad emotional content (sad Stroop), and a control task of naming colors. These were presented in a manner designed to maximize the response selection aspects of the task. Images were stereotactically normalized and analyzed using statistical parametric mapping (SPM). Predictably, subjects were significantly slower during the standard Stroop than the sad Stroop or the control task. The left mideingulate region robustly activated during the standard Stroop compared to the control task. The sad Stroop activated this same region, but to a less significant degree. Correlational regional network analysis revealed an inverse relationship between activation in the left mideingulate and the left insula and temporal lobe. Additionally, activity in different regions of the cingulate gyrus correlated with performance speed during the standard Stroop. These results suggest that the left midcingulate is likely to be part of a neural network activated when one attempts to override a competing verbal response. Finally, the left midcingulate region appears to be functionally coupled to the left insula, temporal, and frontal cortex during cognitive interference tasks involving language. These results underscore the important role of the cingulate gyrus in selecting appropriate and suppressing inappropriate verbal responses. © 1994 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.460010305

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
George, M. S., Ketter, T. A., Parekh, P. I., Rosinsky, N., Ring, H., Casey, B. J., Trimble, M. R., Horwitz, B., Herscovitch, P., & Post, R. M.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-01
Volume
1
Issue
3
Pages
194-209
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
DOI
10.1002/hbm.460010305
OpenAlex
W1994473322
Cited by
252
References
5
FWCI
11.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.