The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control
Abstract
Event‐related potentials were recorded in a flanker task using arrowheads pointing to the left or to the right as targets and as congruent or incongruent flanker stimuli using squares as neutral flanker stimuli. The onset of the flanker stimuli preceded that of the target stimuli byt 100 ms. Lateralized readiness potentials showed response activation below execution threshold in correspondence to the information conveyed by the flanker stimuli. Exclusively, the incongruent flanker condition provoked a N2c, which evolved closely synchronized to the erroneous response. Graded response analyses separating incongruent trials with weak, medium, and strong incorrect response activation revealed that the N2c amplitude covaried with the magnitude of the erroneous response. The N2c in the incongruent compatibility condition of the flanker task thus corresponds to the avoidance of inappropriate responses, possibly reflecting the inhibition of automatically but erroneously primed responses. The results are compatible with studies of error correction, suggesting that efference monitoring is a constituent of executive control.
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
Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03203267 · Cited by 7,230
On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a theory of an act of control
Logan, G. D., & Cowan, W. B. (1984) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.91.3.295 · Cited by 2,590
Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.2.253 · Cited by 1,970
Falkenstein, M., Hohnsbein, J., Hoormann, J., & Blanke, L. (1991) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(91)90062-9 · Cited by 1,706
Cited by
Conflict monitoring and cognitive control
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624 · Cited by 7,351
Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review
Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x · Cited by 2,567
The neural basis of error detection: Conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity
Yeung, N., Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.111.4.931 · Cited by 1,924
ERP components on reaction errors and their functional significance: A tutorial
Falkenstein, M., Hoormann, J., Christ, S., & Hohnsbein, J. (2000) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0301-0511(99)00031-9 · Cited by 1,442
The anterior cingulate as a conflict monitor: fMRI and ERP studies
VANVEEN, V, & CARTER, C. (2002) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0031-9384(02)00930-7 · Cited by 1,258
Metadata
- Authors
- KOPP, B., RIST, F., & MATTLER, U.
- Venue
- Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-05
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 282-294
- ISSN
- 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8986
- OpenAlex
- W1977458372
- Cited by
- 618
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.97
- 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: N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb00425.x
- The paper
- KOPP, B., RIST, F., & MATTLER, U. (1996). N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control. Psychophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb00425.x
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.