| Title |
On the molecular genetics of flexibility: The case of task-switching, inhibitory control and genetic variants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13415-011-0058-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sebastian Markett, Christian Montag, Nora T. Walter, Thomas Plieger, Martin Reuter |
| Abstract |
The adjustment of behavior to changing goals and environmental constraints requires the flexible switching between different task sets. Cognitive flexibility is an endophenotype of executive functioning and is highly heritable, as indicated by twin studies. Individual differences in global flexibility as assessed by reaction-time measurement in a task-switching paradigm were recently related to a single nucleotide polymorphism in the vicinity of the dopamine d2 receptor gene DRD2. In the present study, we assessed whether the DRD2 gene is related to backward inhibition, a control mechanism that contributes to cognitive flexibility by reducing proactive interference by no longer relevant task sets. We found that carriers of the DRD2 A1+ variant who have a lower striatal dopamine d2 receptor density than A1- carriers show a larger backward inhibition effect. This is in line with previous results demonstrating increased behavioral flexibility in carriers of this genetic variant. The discussion relates the present finding to those of previous studies assessing the neurogenetic foundations of inhibitory control. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Researcher | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 23% |
| Unknown | 8 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 39 | 52% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,881,895
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#88
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,167
of 138,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 138,807 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.