Cited by 106Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Cognitive control under contingencies in anxious and depressed adolescents: an antisaccade task

Jazbec, Sandra, McClure, Erin, Hardin, Michael, Pine, Daniel S., Ernst, Monique·2005·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Emotion-related perturbations in cognitive control characterize adult mood and anxiety disorders. Fewer data are available to confirm such deficits in youth. Studies of cognitive control and error processing can provide an ideal template to examine these perturbations. Antisaccade paradigms are particularly well suited for this endeavor because they provide exquisite behavioral measures of modulation of response errors.Methods A new monetary reward antisaccade task was used with 28 healthy, 11 anxious, and 12 depressed adolescents. Performance accuracy, saccade latency, and peak velocity of incorrect responses were analyzed.Results Performance accuracy across all groups was improved by incentives (obtain reward, avoid punishment). However, modulation of saccade errors by incentives differed by groups. In incentive trials relative to neutral trials, inhibitory efficiency (saccade latency) was enhanced in healthy, unaffected in depressed, and diminished in anxious adolescents. Modulation of errant actions (saccade peak velocity) was improved in the healthy group and unchanged in both the anxious and depressed groups.Conclusions These findings provide grounds for testing hypotheses related to the impact of motivation deficits and emotional interference on directed action in adolescents with mood and anxiety disorders. Furthermore, neural mechanisms can now be examined by using this task paired with functional neuroimaging.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.010

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 45 · Cited by 106

Authors
Jazbec, S., McClure, E., Hardin, M., Pine, D. S., & Ernst, M.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-10
Volume
58
Issue
8
Pages
632-639
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034891620
Cited by
106
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
cognitive control, anxiety, depression, adolescents, antisaccade task, monetary rewards, error processing, saccade latency, saccade peak velocity, response inhibition, motivational deficits, emotional interference, mood disorders, anxiety disorders
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Anxiety, Association Learning, Child, Depression, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Saccades, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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