Cited by 1,542Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingMotor Control and Adaptation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the ability to inhibit simple and choice reaction time responses: A model and a method.

Logan, Gordon D., Cowan, William B., Davis, Kenneth A.·1984·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Abstract

This article reports four experiments on the ability to inhibit responses in simple and choice reaction time (RT) tasks. Subjects responding to visually presented letters were occasionally presented with a stop signal (a tone) that told them not to respond on that trial. The major dependent variables were (a) the probability of inhibiting a response when the signal occurred, (b) mean and standard deviation (SD) of RT on no-signal trials, (c) mean RT on trials on which the signal occurred but subjects failed to inhibit, and (d) estimated RT to the stop signal. A model was proposed to estimated RT to the stop signal and to account for the relations among the variables. Its main assumption is that the RT process and the stopping process race, and response inhibition depends on which process finishes first. The model allows us to account for differences in response inhibition between tasks in terms of transformations of stop-signal delay that represent the relative finishing times of the RT process and the stopping process. The transformations specified by the model were successful in group data and in data from individual subjects, regardless of how delays were selected. The experiments also compared different methods of selecting stop-signal delays to equate the probability of inhibition in the two tasks.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.10.2.276

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 15 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 1,001–1,008 of 1,008

Metadata

Authors
Logan, G. D., Cowan, W. B., & Davis, K. A.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Published
1984
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
276-291
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
OpenAlex
W2094955630
Cited by
1,542
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 106 · 2020: 117 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 83 · 2017: 64 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 88 · 2014: 89 · 2013: 78 · 2012: 84
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NPARC (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
response inhibition, stop-signal task, choice reaction time, simple reaction time, stop-signal delay, race model, reaction time variability, individual differences
MeSH terms
Choice Behavior, Cues, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Models, Psychological, Probability, Reaction Time

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