Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 724

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms

Open access
Verbruggen, Frederick, Logan, Gordon D.·2009·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

The stop-signal paradigm is very useful for the study of response inhibition. Stop-signal performance is typically described as a race between a go process, triggered by a go stimulus, and a stop process, triggered by the stop signal. Response inhibition depends on the relative finishing time of these two processes. Numerous studies have shown that the independent horse-race model of Logan and Cowan (1984) accounts for the data very well. In the present article, we review the independent horse-race model and related models, such as the interactive horse-race model (Boucher, Palmeri, Logan & Schall, 2007). We present evidence that favors the independent horse-race model but also some evidence that challenges the model. We end with a discussion of recent models that elaborate the role of a stop process in inhibiting a response.

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 · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.08.014

Cites

36 of 36 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

Cited by

See all 724

Metadata

Authors
Verbruggen, F., & Logan, G. D.
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-05
Volume
33
Issue
5
Pages
647-661
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982378812
Cited by
724
References
36
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.