Cited by 66Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Inhibitory control in anxious and healthy adolescents is modulated by incentive and incidental affective stimuli.

Open access
Hardin, Michael G., Mandell, Darcy, Mueller, Sven C., Dahl, Ronald E., Pine, Daniel S., Ernst, Monique·2009·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Anxiety disorders are characterized by elevated, sustained responses to threat, that manifest as threat attention biases. Recent evidence also suggests exaggerated responses to incentives. How these characteristics influence cognitive control is under debate and is the focus of the present study. Methods: Twenty‐five healthy adolescents and 25 adolescents meeting DSM‐IV diagnostic criteria for an anxiety disorder were compared on a task of response inhibition. Inhibitory control was assayed with an antisaccade task that included both incentive (monetary reward) and incidental emotion (facial expression) cues presented prior to the execution of inhibitory behavior. Results: Inhibitory control was enhanced following exposure to threat cues (fear faces) only in adolescent patients, and following exposure to positive cues (happy faces) only in healthy adolescents. Results also revealed a robust performance improvement associated with monetary incentives. This incentive effect did not differ by group. No interaction between incentives and emotional cues was detected. Conclusions: These findings suggest that biased processing of threat in anxious adolescents affects inhibitory control, perhaps by raising arousal prior to behavioral performance. The absence of normalization of performance in anxious adolescents following exposure to positive emotional cues is a novel finding and will require additional exploration. Future studies will need to more specifically examine how perturbations in positive emotion processes contribute to the symptomatology and the pathogenesis of anxiety disorders.

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02121.x

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Recent studies show that providing incentives can enhance cognitive control performance.

    “A notable exception is recent work demonstrating how incentive can upregulate cognitive control abilities (Geier, et al., 2010; Hardin, et al., 2009), in which participants were rewarded for correctly suppressing an otherwise neutral behavior.”
  • Some studies have found less prefrontal cortical recruitment with increasing age.

    “Some studies, consistent with what is presented here, have demonstrated progressively lesser recruitment of prefrontal cortical regions with increasing age (Hardin, et al., 2009; Velanova, Wheeler, & Luna, 2008).”

    From Frontostriatal maturation predicts cognitive control failure to appetitive cues in adolescents (2011) · cites this paper as Hardin, et al., 2009

    The Methods (Eye Movement Recording; page unavailable) describe eye-tracking measures, and the Discussion (page unavailable) reports how incentives and emotional cues affected inhibitory performance. A search for age-related prefrontal recruitment found no passage in our copy reporting progressively less prefrontal cortical recruitment with increasing age. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Hardin, M. G., Mandell, D., Mueller, S. C., Dahl, R. E., Pine, D. S., & Ernst, M.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Health and Human Services (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Hardin, Michael G.
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-11-05
Volume
50
Issue
12
Pages
1550-1558
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W2088884425
Cited by
66
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
FWCI
8.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (Z99 MH999999)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
inhibitory control, anxiety disorders, adolescents, response inhibition, antisaccade task, financial incentives, positive emotions, facial expressions, emotional cues, arousal
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Affect, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Cognition, Cues, Major Depressive Disorder, Facial Expression, Female, Health Status, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Motivation, Prevalence

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