The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prefrontal function in schizophrenia: confounds and controversies
Abstract
A wealth of clinical data indirectly implicate dysfunction of frontal cortex in schizophrenia, including negative symptoms, the pattern of neuropsychological deficits, and abnormal eye movements. Neuroimaging studies have provided direct evidence of frontal, particularly prefrontal, malfunction, but the results have been inconsistent and controversial. The burning question is whether prefrontal hypofunction is a pathophysiological characteristic of schizophrenia per se or an artifact of the imaging protocol. In studies of patients at rest, ‘hypofrontality’ has been an inconsistent finding, probably because resting is physiologically and psychologically variable. Cognitive activation paradigms, especially during working memory tasks, have been reliable in showing prefrontal hypofunction in patients, but these results have been challenged as artifacts of poor performance. Performance differences have been addressed by studying patients and controls matched either for poor performance or for normal performance. The former approach, which has the potential of elucidating the specificity of physiological mechanisms associated with poor performance, has shown that prefrontal activity in patients with schizophrenia differs quantitatively and qualitatively from that of normals and of other patient populations who perform at a comparable level. The latter approach, which tends not to find prefrontal differences between patients and controls, may be selecting out important aspects of the disease by focusing on unaffected neural functions. While there are pitfalls to each approach and no single study can address all the potential phenomenological confounds, overall, the functional neuroimaging database in patients with schizophrenia suggests that prefrontal cognitive deficits are because of prefrontal pathophysiology and not the inverse.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Remembering the past: two facets of episodic memory explored with positron emission tomography
(1995) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.152.11.1576 · Cited by 593
Cited by
Salience processing and insular cortical function and dysfunction
Uddin, L. Q. (2015) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3857 · Cited by 2,083
Jentsch, J. (1999) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1016/s0893-133x(98)00060-8 · Cited by 1,314
Synaptic reverberation underlying mnemonic persistent activity
Wang, X.-J. (2001) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(00)01868-3 · Cited by 1,059
Synaptic basis of cortical persistent activity: the importance of NMDA receptors to working memory
Wang, X.-J. (1999) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.19-21-09587.1999 · Cited by 859
Executive functions and their disorders
Elliott, R. (2003) · British Medical Bulletin · doi:10.1093/bmb/65.1.49 · Cited by 792
Metadata
- Authors
- Weinberger, D. R., & Berman, K. F.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1996-10-29
- Volume
- 351
- Issue
- 1346
- Pages
- 1495-1503
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2133510276
- Cited by
- 413
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prefrontal function in schizophrenia: confounds and controversies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.1996.0135
- The paper
- Weinberger, D. R., & Berman, K. F. (1996). Prefrontal function in schizophrenia: confounds and controversies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1996.0135
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.