Conflict and inhibition differentially affect the N200/P300 complex in a combined go/nogo and stop-signal task

By Stefanie Enriquez-Geppert, C. Konrad, C. Pantev, René J. Huster. NeuroImage, 2010

358 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Neurophysiology of performance monitoring and adaptive behavior. (2014, background): “It has been argued that the N2 increase in GoNogo tasks can be explained by a conflict between executing and inhibiting a response (146, 158, 378).”
Are the neural correlates of stopping and not going identical? Quantitative meta-analysis of two response inhibition tasks (2011, methodology): “Received 5 October 2010 Revised 9 February 2011 Accepted 25 February 2011 Available online 3 March 2011”
Electroencephalography of response inhibition tasks: functional networks and cognitive contributions. (2013, methodology): “In a followup studywedirectly addressed the influence of go trial frequencies on the activities of N200 generators in theMCC and the frontal region (Enriquez-Geppert et al., 2010).”
Using EEG to Predict Consumers’ Future Choices (2015, background): “…the same button [no-go]), have demonstrated that the frontocentral N200 generates a larger (more negative) deflection after the presentation of a no-go signal than the presentation of a go signal (Enriquez-Geppert et al. 2010; Falkenstein, Hoormann, and Hohnsbein 1999; Van Veen and Carter 2002).”