Cited by 369Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

Go–no go learning after frontal lobe lesions in humans

Open access
Drewe, E.A.·1975·Cortex

Abstract

48 patients with unilateral frontal or non-frontal cortical lesions were given a go - no go learning task. Patients with frontal lesions in either hemisphere took longer to learn the task and made more false "go" responses than control patients. They also, unlike controls, took longer to make in correct positive responses than correct positive ones. Medial frontal lesions were found to be particularly important in giving rise to poor performance on this task. It is suggested that this task is non-unitary in nature and that the medial area may be important for more than one ability.

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/s0010-9452(75)80015-3

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. -, MISHKIN, M., and RosvoLD, H.E. (1963) Positive and inhibitory motor CRs in monkeys after ablation of orbital or dorsolateral surface of the frontal cortex, in 2nd Symposium on Peripheral and Central Mechanisms of Motor Functions, ed. by E. Gutman and P. Hnik, Liblice, Czechoslovakia, Czech. Academy of Sciences, Prague.
  2. DREWE, E.A. (1973) An experimental investigation of deficits found following lesions in the frontal lobes, unpubl. Ph. D. thesis, University of London.
  3. LAWICKA, W., MISHKIN, M., and RosvoLD, H.E. (1966)< Dissociation of impairment on auditory tasks following orbital and dorsolateral frontal lesions in monkeys, "Proc. Congr. Polish Physiol. Soc.," Lublin, Poland, 10, 178.
  4. MISHKIN, M. (1964) Perseveration of central sets after frontal lesions in monkeys, in The Frontal Granular Cortex and Behavior, ed. by J.M. Warren and K. Akert, McGraw Hill, New York.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Drewe, E. A.
Corresponding author
Drewe, E.A.
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1975-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
8-16
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092018014
Cited by
369
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 12
FWCI
0.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
frontal lobe lesions, frontal cortex, medial frontal cortex, response inhibition, hemispheric lateralization
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Diseases, Brain Mapping, Chronic Disease, Cues, Discrimination Learning, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Intelligence, Middle Aged, Psychosurgery, Reaction Time, Serial Learning, Time Factors

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