Limits...
Comparative survey of go/no-go results to identify the inhibitory control ability change of Japanese children.

Terasawa K, Tabuchi H, Yanagisawa H, Yanagisawa A, Shinohara K, Terasawa S, Saijo O, Masaki T - Biopsychosoc Med (2014)

Bottom Line: In 2008, there were increases in the number of errors in groups from each age range.The comparison also revealed that overall error rates peaked at later ages in the 2008 subjects.While a lifestyle questionnaire revealed several differences in factors such as bedtimes and hours spent watching TV, analysis did not reveal a significant correlation.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Shinshu University, Faculty of Education, 6-Ro Nishinagano Naganoshi, Nagano 380-8544, Japan.

ABSTRACT
This research, conducted in 1998 and 2008, uses go/no-go data to investigate the fundamentals of cognitive functioning in the inhibitory control ability of Japanese children. 844 subjects from kindergarten to junior high school participated in go/no-go task experiments. Performance of go/no-go tasks, which are frequently used to investigate response inhibition, measures a variety of cognitive components besides response inhibition. With normal brain development, the ability to inhibit responses improves substantially in adolescence. An increase over time in the error rate during the go/no-go tasks of subjects of the same age indicates that these processes are not functioning properly. Comparisons between the 1998 and 2008 data revealed several differences in error rates. In 2008, there were increases in the number of errors in groups from each age range. The comparison also revealed that overall error rates peaked at later ages in the 2008 subjects. Taken together, these results show changing conditions in the inhibitory function of the prefrontal cortex. However, the reason for these changing conditions remains unclear. While a lifestyle questionnaire revealed several differences in factors such as bedtimes and hours spent watching TV, analysis did not reveal a significant correlation.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The presentation order of Go/No-Go tasks. (A): During the formation stage, a red light was displayed to train participants in when to grasp a rubber ball. (B): The stimuli were the same for the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages. During the differentiation stage, participants were asked to squeeze the rubber ball when the light was red, but not when it was yellow. The roles of the red and yellow lights were reversed during the reverse differentiation stage.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109780&req=5

Figure 1: The presentation order of Go/No-Go tasks. (A): During the formation stage, a red light was displayed to train participants in when to grasp a rubber ball. (B): The stimuli were the same for the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages. During the differentiation stage, participants were asked to squeeze the rubber ball when the light was red, but not when it was yellow. The roles of the red and yellow lights were reversed during the reverse differentiation stage.

Mentions: The go/no-go task consisted of the following three stages: formation, differentiation, and reverse differentiation. In the formation stage, the participants were trained to squeeze a rubber ball in response to a red light stimulus, which was displayed five times (Figure 1A). For the differentiation stage, they were asked to squeeze it in response to red but not to yellow (Figure 1B). For the reverse differentiation stage, the instructions were reversed; that is, they squeezed the ball in response to yellow but not to red. Each participant performed 20 trials each during the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages and the number of errors from the 40 trials of the two stages was calculated. Yellow and red stimuli were used for G1 to G9 subjects, and bright and dim lights were used as stimuli for G10 to G12 subjects. The duration of each stimulus was random between 200 and 1100 ms. The inter-stimulus interval was also random between 1300 and 7500 ms.


Comparative survey of go/no-go results to identify the inhibitory control ability change of Japanese children.

Terasawa K, Tabuchi H, Yanagisawa H, Yanagisawa A, Shinohara K, Terasawa S, Saijo O, Masaki T - Biopsychosoc Med (2014)

The presentation order of Go/No-Go tasks. (A): During the formation stage, a red light was displayed to train participants in when to grasp a rubber ball. (B): The stimuli were the same for the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages. During the differentiation stage, participants were asked to squeeze the rubber ball when the light was red, but not when it was yellow. The roles of the red and yellow lights were reversed during the reverse differentiation stage.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109780&req=5

Figure 1: The presentation order of Go/No-Go tasks. (A): During the formation stage, a red light was displayed to train participants in when to grasp a rubber ball. (B): The stimuli were the same for the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages. During the differentiation stage, participants were asked to squeeze the rubber ball when the light was red, but not when it was yellow. The roles of the red and yellow lights were reversed during the reverse differentiation stage.
Mentions: The go/no-go task consisted of the following three stages: formation, differentiation, and reverse differentiation. In the formation stage, the participants were trained to squeeze a rubber ball in response to a red light stimulus, which was displayed five times (Figure 1A). For the differentiation stage, they were asked to squeeze it in response to red but not to yellow (Figure 1B). For the reverse differentiation stage, the instructions were reversed; that is, they squeezed the ball in response to yellow but not to red. Each participant performed 20 trials each during the differentiation and reverse differentiation stages and the number of errors from the 40 trials of the two stages was calculated. Yellow and red stimuli were used for G1 to G9 subjects, and bright and dim lights were used as stimuli for G10 to G12 subjects. The duration of each stimulus was random between 200 and 1100 ms. The inter-stimulus interval was also random between 1300 and 7500 ms.

Bottom Line: In 2008, there were increases in the number of errors in groups from each age range.The comparison also revealed that overall error rates peaked at later ages in the 2008 subjects.While a lifestyle questionnaire revealed several differences in factors such as bedtimes and hours spent watching TV, analysis did not reveal a significant correlation.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Shinshu University, Faculty of Education, 6-Ro Nishinagano Naganoshi, Nagano 380-8544, Japan.

ABSTRACT
This research, conducted in 1998 and 2008, uses go/no-go data to investigate the fundamentals of cognitive functioning in the inhibitory control ability of Japanese children. 844 subjects from kindergarten to junior high school participated in go/no-go task experiments. Performance of go/no-go tasks, which are frequently used to investigate response inhibition, measures a variety of cognitive components besides response inhibition. With normal brain development, the ability to inhibit responses improves substantially in adolescence. An increase over time in the error rate during the go/no-go tasks of subjects of the same age indicates that these processes are not functioning properly. Comparisons between the 1998 and 2008 data revealed several differences in error rates. In 2008, there were increases in the number of errors in groups from each age range. The comparison also revealed that overall error rates peaked at later ages in the 2008 subjects. Taken together, these results show changing conditions in the inhibitory function of the prefrontal cortex. However, the reason for these changing conditions remains unclear. While a lifestyle questionnaire revealed several differences in factors such as bedtimes and hours spent watching TV, analysis did not reveal a significant correlation.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus