ArticlePloS one2024
The point of no return in the Emotional Stop-Signal Task: A matter of affect or method?
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Inhibitory control deficits in borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis of stop-signal and Go/No-Go tasks.Psychological medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of aging and valence on emotional response inhibition: conclusions from a novel stop-signal task.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An affective variant of the Stop-Signal task was used to study the interaction between emotion and response inhibition (RI) in healthy young participants. The task involved the covert presentation of emotional faces as go stimuli, as well as a manipulation of motivation and affect by inducing a negative mood through the assignment of unfair punishment. In the literature on emotion and RI, there are contrasting findings reflecting the variability in the method used to calculate the RI latency, namely the Stop-Signal Reaction Time (SSRT). In fact, previous studies found both facilitatory and detrimental effects of affective manipulations over RI. However, they did not use the most robust SSRT estimation approach, namely the integration, casting some doubts on the reliability of the inferences. For these reasons, the present research draws attention on how the effect of the emotional manipulation may be due to a biased SSRT estimation. Specifically, the focus of our study was on how the effect of emotion on the SSRT may vary according to different estimation procedures, the mean and two variants of the integration method. We predicted that the effect of the emotional manipulation in the SST would depend on the SSRT estimation method employed. Indeed, a significant effect of emotion was only found when SSRT was estimated with the mean method. We conclude that the mean method should be avoided in the study of emotion and RI because it overestimates SSRT. Rather, the integration approach should be used for future research in this field, while also factoring in information about the participants' strategy in emotional contexts that require greater effortful control and offer a challenge to self-regulation both in health and disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.