The DOI matches its Crossref record; 136 of the 136 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review of ERP and fMRI studies investigating inhibitory control and error processing in people
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Several current theories emphasize the role of cognitive control in addiction. The present review evaluates neural deficits in the domains of inhibitory control and error processing in individuals with substance dependence and in those showing excessive addiction-like behaviours. The combined evaluation of event-related potential (ERP) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) findings in the present review offers unique information on neural deficits in addicted individuals. METHODS: We selected 19 ERP and 22 fMRI studies using stop-signal, go/no-go or Flanker paradigms based on a search of PubMed and Embase. RESULTS: The most consistent findings in addicted individuals relative to healthy controls were lower N2, error-related negativity and error positivity amplitudes as well as hypoactivation in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), inferior frontal gyrus and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. These neural deficits, however, were not always associated with impaired task performance. With regard to behavioural addictions, some evidence has been found for similar neural deficits; however, studies are scarce and results are not yet conclusive. Differences among the major classes of substances of abuse were identified and involve stronger neural responses to errors in individuals with alcohol dependence versus weaker neural responses to errors in other substance-dependent populations. LIMITATIONS: Task design and analysis techniques vary across studies, thereby reducing comparability among studies and the potential of clinical use of these measures. CONCLUSION: Current addiction theories were supported by identifying consistent abnormalities in prefrontal brain function in individuals with addiction. An integrative model is proposed, suggesting that neural deficits in the dorsal ACC may constitute a hallmark neurocognitive deficit under lying addictive behaviours, such as loss of 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
Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions
Stroop, J. R. (1935) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0054651 · Cited by 18,622
Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain
Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn755 · Cited by 12,881
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
Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update
Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.003 · Cited by 3,623
The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control
Ridderinkhof, K. R., Ullsperger, M., Crone, E. A., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1100301 · Cited by 2,974
Anterior Cingulate Conflict Monitoring and Adjustments in Control
Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1089910 · Cited by 2,891
Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications
Goldstein, R. Z., & Volkow, N. D. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3119 · Cited by 2,749
Nigg, J. T. (2000) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.220 · Cited by 1,941 · cited 1×
“23,24 To keep the present review focused and to be able to make straightforward comparisons of results, we included only studies using go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms.”
MethodImpulsivity, compulsivity, and top-down cognitive control
Dalley, J. W., Everitt, B. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.01.020 · Cited by 1,589
Jentsch, J. D., & Taylor, J. R. (1999) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/pl00005483 · Cited by 1,545
Cited by
Deficits in behavioural inhibition in substance abuse and addiction: a meta-analysis.
Smith, J. L., Mattick, R. P., Jamadar, S. D., & Iredale, J. M. (2014) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.08.009 · Cited by 546
The erring brain: Error‐related negativity as an endophenotype for OCD—A review and meta‐analysis
Riesel, A. (2019) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.13348 · Cited by 170
Structural and functional correlates of smartphone addiction
Horvath, J., Mundinger, C., Schmitgen, M. M., Wolf, N. D., Sambataro, F., Hirjak, D., Kubera, K. M., Koenig, J., & Christian Wolf, R. (2020) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106334 · Cited by 190
Atypical interoception as a common risk factor for psychopathology: A review
Brewer, R., Murphy, J., & Bird, G. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.07.036 · Cited by 180
Dong, G., & Potenza, M. N. (2016) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.11.011 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Luijten, M., Machielsen, M., Veltman, D., Hester, R., de Haan, L., & Franken, I.
- Venue
- Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2014-05-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 149-169
- ISSN
- 1180-4882 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1602290488
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 136
- FWCI
- 2.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Systematic review of ERP and fMRI studies investigating inhibitory control and error processing in people. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1503/jpn.130052
- The paper
- Luijten, M., Machielsen, M., Veltman, D., Hester, R., de Haan, L., & Franken, I. (2014). Systematic review of ERP and fMRI studies investigating inhibitory control and error processing in people. Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.130052
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.