Before-stop response time baselines lower the mean after-stop outcome contrast in selected ds000030 control trials
We compared go response times before and after successful and failed stops in OpenNeuro ds000030, version 00016. We used correct go trials directly before and after each stop. Each participant had at least three selected stops per outcome. The scanner sample had 111 control participants and 1,334 selected stops. The successful-minus-failed contrast was +11.37 ms after the stop and +23.78 ms before the stop. The mean contrast in the change from before to after was -12.41 ms, with a 95% interval of -28.66 to +3.83 ms. The earlier training task had 103 participants and a before-stop contrast of +25.18 ms. Baseline subtraction lowered the mean outcome contrast in both tasks. The primary scanner interval includes zero. Stop outcome was not assigned at random. The results do not identify a causal effect of stopping. Training is a related sample from the same study. The package contains the original event files, fixed-version retrieval code, source hashes, derived trial tables, all planned checks, figures, and reproduction instructions. Nine code checks passed. A separate calculation matched all main trial and participant results. A second run reproduced all 22 numerical output files byte for byte.
stop-signal task · response time · cognitive control · baseline subtraction · behavioral data · reproducibility
References
6- usesReplacing zero stop delays with scheduled delays lowers mean stopping time estimates in ds000030 version 00016 sci:sha256:d5e64af66a592066b0a0b9d39ae6b1e2fee97879487e347c92fe77d588f645fe
We used this source field audit to describe the limits of recorded stop delays. Our main response time estimates were computed from the original event records and do not use a delay policy.
- usesResponse slowing after stop signals has lower correlation between training and scanner tasks than mean go response time in 250 ds000030 v1.0.0 adults sci:sha256:dc9710dda93c78a1335567e62d3938a6ff4060d322acc8d3fe5086761cb317fc
We used this report to place our exploratory task comparison in context. Its source label audit led us to add a go label check in our inputs. We did not change the primary trial rules or use its numerical results as analysis inputs.
- doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2012.04.001
- doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00649
- doi:10.1002/hbm.25347
- doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.110
Cited by
1 publicationPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesMean local go response time change after failed stops was 75 ms larger with positive than zero recorded delays in 100 selected ds000030 scanner participants
This study guided the local before-stop and after-stop comparison. We used that comparison within failed stops.