Cited by 217Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Reliability and plasticity of response inhibition and interference control

Wöstmann, Nicola M., Aichert, Désirée S., Costa, Anna, Rubia, Katya, Möller, Hans-Jürgen, Ettinger, Ulrich·2013·Brain and Cognition

Abstract

This study investigated the internal reliability, temporal stability and plasticity of commonly used measures of inhibition-related functions. Stop-signal, go/no-go, antisaccade, Simon, Eriksen flanker, Stroop and Continuous Performance tasks were administered twice to 23 healthy participants over a period of approximately 11 weeks in order to assess test-retest correlations, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and systematic between as well as within session performance changes. Most of the inhibition-related measures showed good test-retest reliabilities and internal consistencies, with the exception of the stop-signal reaction time measure, which showed poor reliability. Generally no systematic performance changes were observed across the two assessments with the exception of four variables of the Eriksen flanker, Simon and Stroop task which showed reduced variability of reaction time and an improvement in the response time for incongruent trials at second assessment. Predominantly stable performance within one test session was shown for most measures. Overall, these results are informative for studies with designs requiring temporally stable parameters e.g. genetic or longitudinal treatment studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandc.2012.09.010

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Strong test-retest reliability and internal consistency have been reported for commonly used cognitive control paradigms.

    “Moderate-to-high heritability (Friedman et al, 2008; Stins et al, 2004), as well as strong test–retest reliability and internal consistency (Wöstmann et al, 2013) have been reported for commonly used cognitive control paradigms (eg, Stroop, Eriksen Flanker).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 123 · Cited by 217

Authors
Wöstmann, N. M., Aichert, D. S., Costa, A., Rubia, K., Möller, H.-J., & Ettinger, U.
Affiliations
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Bonn (DE)
Corresponding author
Ettinger, Ulrich
Venue
Brain and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-02
Volume
81
Issue
1
Pages
82-94
ISSN
0278-2626 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058353175
Cited by
217
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
response inhibition, interference control, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, temporal stability, stop-signal task, go/no-go task, antisaccade task, Simon task, flanker task, Stroop task, continuous performance test, reaction time variability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Neuronal Plasticity, Reaction Time, Task Performance and Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

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