A developmental examination of medial frontal theta dynamics and inhibitory control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medial frontal theta-band oscillations are a robust marker of action-outcome monitoring. In a large developmental sample (n = 432, 9-16 years), we examined whether phase and non-phase locked medial frontal theta power were related to inhibitory control among children and adolescents. Our results showed that the well-established increase in medial frontal theta power during inhibitory control was captured largely by non-phase locked dynamics, which partially mediated the positive effect of age on task performance. A person-centered approach also revealed latent classes of individuals based on their multivariate theta power dynamics (phase locked/non-phase locked, GO/NOGO). The class of individuals showing low phase locked and high non-phase locked medial frontal theta were significantly older, had better inhibitory control, scored higher on measures of general cognitive function, and were more efficient in their behavioural responses. The functional significance of phase and non-phase locked theta dynamics, and their potential changes, could have important implications for action-outcome monitoring and cognitive function in both typical and atypical development, as well as related psychopathology .
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 | 0.001 | 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".