Cited by 477Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Frontostriatal Microstructure Modulates Efficient Recruitment of Cognitive Control

Liston, Conor, Watts, Richard, Tottenham, Nim, Davidson, Matthew C., Niogi, Sumit, Ulug, Aziz M., Casey, B.J.·2006·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

Many studies have linked activity in a frontostriatal network with the capacity to suppress inappropriate thoughts and actions, but relatively few have examined the role of connectivity between these structures. Here, we use diffusion tensor imaging to assess frontostriatal connectivity in 21 subjects (ages 7-31 years). Fifteen subjects were tested on a go/no-go task, where they responded with a button press to a visual stimulus and inhibited a response to a second infrequent stimulus. An automated fiber tracking algorithm was used to delineate white matter fibers adjacent to ventral prefrontal cortex and the striatum, and the corticospinal tract, which was not expected to contribute to control per se. Diffusion in frontostriatal and corticospinal tracts became more restricted with age. This shift was paralleled by an increase in efficiency of task performance. Frontostriatal radial diffusivities predicted faster reaction times, independent of age and accuracy, and this correlation grew stronger for trials expected to require greater control. This was not observed in the corticospinal tract. On trials matched for speed of task performance, adults were significantly more accurate, and accuracies were correlated with frontostriatal, but not corticospinal, diffusivities. These findings suggest that frontostriatal connectivity may contribute to developmental and individual differences in the efficient recruitment of cognitive control.

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 · 10.1093/cercor/bhj003

Cites

59 of 59 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?

  • These neurobiological changes underlie profound maturation in motivational and cognitive domains across adolescence.

    “These neurobiological changes underlie the profound maturation in motivational and cognitive domains across adolescence [30–34]”

    From Adolescent nicotine exposure and persistent neurocircuitry changes: unveiling lifelong psychiatric risks (2025) · cites this paper as [34]

    The Introduction (page not provided) describes frontostriatal maturation through adolescence alongside developing cognitive control, and the Discussion links frontostriatal connectivity to that capacity. The paper does not address maturation in the motivational domain; its reported comparison is primarily between children and adults, rather than a demonstration of change across adolescence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • White matter tracts between prefrontal-basal ganglia and posterior fiber tracts continue to develop across childhood into adulthood, but only tracts between the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia are correlated with impulse control, as measured by performance on a go/no-go task.

    “Using a similar approach, Liston and colleagues (2006) have shown that white matter tracts between prefrontal–basal ganglia and posterior fiber tracts continue to develop across childhood into adulthood, but only tracts between the prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia are correlated with impulse control, as measured by performance on a go/no-go task.”

    From <i>The Adolescent Brain</i> (2008) · cites this paper as Liston et al. 2006

  • Stop-signal reaction time did not correlate significantly with right dlPFC-striatum functional connectivity.

    “Consistent with several studies (53), there was a significant correlation between SSRT and right IFG -striatum tract strength ( r = -0.31, P = 0.045) but, importantly, not with structural and functional connectivity of the right dlPFC -striatum ( r = -0.15, P = 0.33, and r = 0.06, P = 0.66, respectively; Fig. S2).”
  • Stop-signal reaction time correlated significantly with right IFG-striatum tract strength.

    “Consistent with several studies (53), there was a significant correlation between SSRT and right IFG -striatum tract strength ( r = -0.31, P = 0.045) but, importantly, not with structural and functional connectivity of the right dlPFC -striatum ( r = -0.15, P = 0.33, and r = 0.06, P = 0.66, respectively; Fig. S2).”
  • Stop-signal reaction time did not correlate significantly with right dlPFC-striatum structural connectivity.

    “Consistent with several studies (53), there was a significant correlation between SSRT and right IFG -striatum tract strength ( r = -0.31, P = 0.045) but, importantly, not with structural and functional connectivity of the right dlPFC -striatum ( r = -0.15, P = 0.33, and r = 0.06, P = 0.66, respectively; Fig. S2).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liston, C., Watts, R., Tottenham, N., Davidson, M. C., Niogi, S., Ulug, A. M., & Casey, B. J.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
Liston, Conor
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2005-07-20
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
553-560
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2137938217
Cited by
477
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 73 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 22
FWCI
9.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH063255, R01 MH 63255, R01MH091864, P01 MH 62196)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R21 DA 15882, R21DA015882)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM 07739, T32GM007739)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
frontostriatal connectivity, cognitive control, white matter microstructure, radial diffusivity, go/no-go task, response inhibition, ventral prefrontal cortex, striatum, corticospinal tract, developmental changes, individual differences, diffusion tensor imaging, tractography
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aging, Brain Mapping, Child, Cognition, Corpus Striatum, Discrimination Learning, Female, Humans, Male, Neural Pathways, Psychomotor Performance, Prefrontal Cortex

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