Cited by 441Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesSchizophrenia research and treatment

Impaired cognitive flexibility and motor inhibition in unaffected first-degree relatives of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder

Open access
Chamberlain, Samuel R., Fineberg, Naomi A., Menzies, Lara A., Blackwell, Andrew D., Bullmore, Edward T., Robbins, Trevor W., Sahakian, Barbara J.·2007·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is highly heritable. Attempts to delineate precise genetic contributions have met with limited success. There is an ongoing search for intermediate cognitive brain markers (endophenotypes) that may help clarify genetic contributions. The aim was to assess inhibitory control processes in unaffected first-degree relatives of OCD patients for the first time with objective tests. METHOD: The Intradimensional/Extradimensional Shift, Stop-Signal, and Cambridge Gamble tasks were administered to 20 unaffected first-degree relatives, 20 OCD patient probands with washing/checking symptoms, and 20 healthy matched comparison subjects without a family history of OCD. RESULTS: Unaffected first-degree relatives and OCD patient probands showed cognitive inflexibility (extradimensional set shifting) and motor impulsivity (stop-signal reaction times). Decision making (Cambridge Gamble task) was intact. CONCLUSIONS: Deficits in cognitive flexibility and motor inhibition may represent cognitive endophenotypes for OCD. Such measures will play a key role in understanding genotype/phenotype associations for OCD and related spectrum conditions.

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 · 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.2.335

Cites

19 of 19 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?

  • Cognitive inflexibility deficits persist in remitted patients and are also observed in unaffected first-degree relatives.

    “Importantly, these deficits persist in remitted patients and are also observed in unaffected first-degree relatives (10, 11, 19), supporting the view that cognitive inflexibility represents a candidate endophenotype (or trait-like marker) of OCD.”

    From Neural mechanisms underlying cognitive inflexibility in obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Abstract Results and Discussion report cognitive inflexibility in unaffected first-degree relatives of OCD patients, supporting that part of the claim and the proposed endophenotype interpretation. The paper does not examine whether deficits persist in remitted patients. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Impaired action cancelation and action restraint has been described for OCD; patients showed increased SSRT in the Stop-signal task and higher error rates on the Go/No Go task compared with healthy control subjects.

    “Impaired action cancelation and action restraint has been described for OCD (Chamberlain et al., 2007b; Penades et al., 2007); patients showed increased SSRT (i.e., slower inhibition) in the Stop-signal task and higher error rates on the Go/No Go task compared with healthy control subjects.”

    From Response Inhibition and Interference Control in Obsessive–Compulsive Spectrum Disorders (2014) · cites this paper as Chamberlain et al., 2007b

    The Results report that OCD patients had significantly longer stop-signal reaction times than healthy comparison subjects, supporting the action-cancelation finding. The Method lists the tasks administered, but not a Go/No Go task; our copy does not support the claim about higher Go/No Go error rates or action restraint. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Experimental studies using stop-signal, ID/ED set-shifting, reversal-learning, and Tower of London planning tasks have shown that patients with OCD often require greater cognitive effort to inhibit prepotent responses, adapt to changing contingencies, or organise goal-directed behaviour.

    “Experimental studies using tasks such as the stop-signal task, intradimensional/extradimensional (ID/ED) set-shifting task, reversal-learning paradigms, and Tower of London planning tasks have further shown that patients with OCD often require greater cognitive effort to inhibit prepotent responses, adapt to changing contingencies, or organise goal-directed behaviour [5,6,7,8].”

    From Electrophysiological Correlates of Cognitive Dysfunction in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD): A Systematic and Mechanistic Review of EEG, ERP, and QEEG Evidence (2026) · cites this paper as [8]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Deficits in motor response inhibition were also observed in unaffected first-degree relatives of OCD patients.

    “Deficits in motor response inhibition were also observed in unaffected first-degree relatives of OCD patients (Chamberlain et al., 2007b; Menzies et al., 2007), suggesting that motor response inhibition may be considered an endophenotype”
  • OCD patients have dysfunction in core neural processes mapped onto CSTC circuits, such as response inhibition and sensorimotor gating.

    “evidence from recent human studies suggests that OCD patients have dysfunction in core neural processes mapped onto CSTC circuits, such as response inhibition 70,71,72 and sensorimotor gating 73.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [16]Nelson HE. National Adult Reading Test (NART): Test Manual. Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson; 1982. [[Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=National%20Adult%20Reading%20Test%20(NART):%20Test%20Manual&author=HE%20Nelson&publication_year=1982&)]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chamberlain, S. R., Fineberg, N. A., Menzies, L. A., Blackwell, A. D., Bullmore, E. T., Robbins, T. W., & Sahakian, B. J.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2007-02
Volume
164
Issue
2
Pages
335-338
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2105875973
Cited by
438
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 24
FWCI
22.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • Wellcome Trust (076244, 076274/Z04/Z)
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, cognitive flexibility, cognitive endophenotypes, motor inhibition, motor impulsivity, first-degree relatives, genetic susceptibility, inhibitory control, set-shifting, stop-signal reaction time, decision-making, genotype-phenotype correlation
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition Disorders, Compulsive Behavior, Decision Making, Family Health, Female, Genetic Markers, Genotype, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Motor Activity, Neuropsychological Tests, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Pedigree, Phenotype, Psychomotor Performance, 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