124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27410426)
1. Are you able not to react to what you hear? Inhibition behavior measured with an auditory Go/NoGo paradigm.
Wegmann E; Brand M; Snagowski J; Schiebener J
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol; 2017 Feb; 39(1):58-71. PubMed ID: 27410426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Response inhibition toward alcohol-related cues using an alcohol go/no-go task in problem and non-problem drinkers.
Kreusch F; Vilenne A; Quertemont E
Addict Behav; 2013 Oct; 38(10):2520-8. PubMed ID: 23773960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A carry-over task rule in task switching: an ERP investigation using a Go/Nogo paradigm.
Umebayashi K; Okita T
Biol Psychol; 2013 Feb; 92(2):295-300. PubMed ID: 23182873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative analysis of event-related potentials during Go/NoGo and CPT: decomposition of electrophysiological markers of response inhibition and sustained attention.
Kirmizi-Alsan E; Bayraktaroglu Z; Gurvit H; Keskin YH; Emre M; Demiralp T
Brain Res; 2006 Aug; 1104(1):114-28. PubMed ID: 16824492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: children vs. adults.
Barry RJ; De Blasio FM; Borchard JP
Clin Neurophysiol; 2014 Oct; 125(10):1995-2006. PubMed ID: 24661623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Late ERP components in visual and auditory Go/Nogo tasks.
Falkenstein M; Koshlykova NA; Kiroj VN; Hoormann J; Hohnsbein J
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1995 Jan; 96(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 7530187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effects of amnestic mild cognitive impairment on N2 and P3 Go/NoGo ERP components.
Cid-Fernández S; Lindín M; Díaz F
J Alzheimers Dis; 2014; 38(2):295-306. PubMed ID: 23963292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Sequential processing in an auditory equiprobable Go/NoGo task with variable interstimulus interval.
Borchard JP; Barry RJ; De Blasio FM
Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Aug; 97(2):145-52. PubMed ID: 26024616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. On the use of event-related potentials to auditory stimuli in the Go/NoGo task.
Smith JL; Douglas KM
Psychiatry Res; 2011 Sep; 193(3):177-81. PubMed ID: 21764566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Sequential processing in the equiprobable auditory Go/NoGo task: a temporal PCA study.
Barry RJ; De Blasio FM
Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Jul; 89(1):123-7. PubMed ID: 23792217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of pre-stimulus processing on subsequent events in a warned Go/NoGo paradigm: response preparation, execution and inhibition.
Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
Int J Psychophysiol; 2006 Aug; 61(2):121-33. PubMed ID: 16214250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Response inhibition and interference control in children with AD/HD: a visual ERP investigation.
Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ; Markovska V; Dimoska A; Clarke AR
Int J Psychophysiol; 2009 May; 72(2):145-53. PubMed ID: 19095016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Movement-related potentials in the Go/NoGo task: the P3 reflects both cognitive and motor inhibition.
Smith JL; Johnstone SJ; Barry RJ
Clin Neurophysiol; 2008 Mar; 119(3):704-714. PubMed ID: 18164657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Differences in blood flow between auditory and visual stimuli in the Psychomotor Vigilance Task and GO/NOGO Task.
Hiroyasu T; Fukushima A; Yokouchi H
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2012; 2012():1466-9. PubMed ID: 23366178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Relationships between the color-word matching Stroop task and the Go/NoGo task: toward multifaceted assessment of attention and inhibition abilities of children.
Morooka T; Ogino T; Takeuchi A; Hanafusa K; Oka M; Ohtsuka Y
Acta Med Okayama; 2012; 66(5):377-86. PubMed ID: 23093056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Isolating the neural mechanisms of interference during continuous multisensory dual-task performance.
Kasper RW; Cecotti H; Touryan J; Eckstein MP; Giesbrecht B
J Cogn Neurosci; 2014 Mar; 26(3):476-89. PubMed ID: 24047391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. CNV resolution does not cause NoGo anteriorisation of the P3: a failure to replicate Simson et al.
Smith JL; Barry RJ; Steiner GZ
Int J Psychophysiol; 2013 Sep; 89(3):349-57. PubMed ID: 23669175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Response inhibition and attention processing in 5- to 7-year-old children with and without symptoms of ADHD: An ERP study.
Spronk M; Jonkman LM; Kemner C
Clin Neurophysiol; 2008 Dec; 119(12):2738-52. PubMed ID: 18951061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Congruency reversals in an accessory signal Simon task with auditory and visual stimuli.
Soetens E; Maetens K; Zeischka P; Henderickx D
Acta Psychol (Amst); 2010 Jul; 134(3):391-7. PubMed ID: 20451168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Auditory-induced emotion modulates processes of response inhibition: an event-related potential study.
Yu F; Yuan J; Luo YJ
Neuroreport; 2009 Jan; 20(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 18978645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
