|
Thanks for your comments. I was more <a href="http://ntiadhm.com">conncreed</a> with the complete inaccuracy of the press release in this post than the details of the study, but here are a few specific thoughts...Jona - I agree, it would have been nice if effect sizes were given (and actual values were reported for no-go accuracy). On the inhibitory front, there is some evidence that the no-go P3 is related to , although this is disputed (as you noted).Anonymous of August 11, 2013 7:51 AM - The action and inaction primes were matched for frequency, according to the authors. The participants saw each word about 50 times. There might be a difference in the negative wave occurring about 200 msec post-target onset (that would be about 283 msec post-prime onset), although I'm not so sure this is N400. The meaning of the action words does conflict with the goal of not responding on no-go trials (some more directly than others). That negative blip is slightly larger for action vs. inaction, but I'd expect action to differ from control (which appear to be non-pronounceable nonwords). |
