The Effects of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome on Response Execution and Inhibition: An Event‐Related Potential Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both executive function deficits and slower processing speed are characteristic of children with fetal alcohol exposure, but the temporal dynamics of neural activity underlying cognitive processing deficits in fetal alcohol spectrum disorder have rarely been studied. To this end, event-related potentials (ERPs) were used to examine the nature of alcohol-related effects on response inhibition by identifying differences in neural activation during task performance. METHODS: We recorded ERPs during a Go/No-go response inhibition task in 2 groups of children in Cape Town, South Africa (M age = 11.7 years; range = 10 to 13)-one diagnosed with fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) or partial FAS (FAS/PFAS; n = 7); the other, a control group whose mothers abstained or drank only minimally during pregnancy (n = 6). Children were instructed to press a "Go" response button to all letter stimuli presented except for the letter "X," the "No-go" stimulus, which occurred relatively infrequently. RESULTS: Task performance accuracy and reaction time did not differ between groups, but differences emerged for 3 ERP components-P2, N2, and P3. The FAS/PFAS group showed a slower latency to peak P2, suggesting less efficient processing of visual information at a relatively early stage ( approximately 200 ms after stimulus onset). Moreover, controls showed a larger P2 amplitude to Go versus No-go, indicating an early discrimination between conditions that was not seen in the FAS/PFAS group. Consistent with previous literature on tasks related to cognitive control, the control group showed a well-defined, larger N2 to No-go versus Go, which was not evident in the FAS/PFAS group. Both groups showed the expected larger P3 amplitude to No-go versus Go, but this condition difference persisted in a late slow wave for the FAS/PFAS group, suggesting increased cognitive effort. CONCLUSIONS: The timing and amplitude differences in the ERP measures suggest that slower, less efficient processing characterizes the FAS/PFAS group during initial stimulus identification. Moreover, the exposed children showed less sharply defined components throughout the stimulus and response evaluation processes involved in successful response inhibition. Although both groups were able to inhibit their responses equally well, the level of neural activation in the children with FAS/PFAS was greater, suggesting more cognitive effort. The specific deficits in response inhibition processing at discrete stages of neural activation may have implications for understanding the nature of alcohol-related deficits in other cognitive domains as well.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".