MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cue‐ versus response‐locked processes in backward inhibition: Evidence from ERPs

2007· article· en· W2166282462 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Sinai, Philippe Goffaux, Natalie A. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychophysiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyResponse inhibitionTask (project management)Negativity effectEvent-related potentialSet (abstract data type)Cognitive psychologyElectrophysiologySelective attentionTask switchingInhibitory controlElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceCognitionComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A task set may need to be inhibited to facilitate the switch to another task. This event-related potential (ERP) study determined (1) whether backward inhibition (BI) is exerted preferentially in high interference environments, and (2) whether ERPs locked to critical time points reflect BI during cue preparation and/or response stages. High interference (HI) and low interference (LI) were created by manipulating task difficulty. A reaction time (RT) BI effect (i.e., BI>control trials) was shown only during HI tasks. Cue-locked ERPs on LI tasks suggest increased attentional resources were allocated during the reactivation of a recently inhibited task. For HI tasks, BI versus control trial differences were reflected in a response-locked ERP negativity only after response selection (indexed by the response-locked lateralized readiness potential), indicating that BI is a lateral inhibition mechanism exerted during response preparation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.225
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychophysiologySame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207