Web-Based Independent Versus Laboratory-Based Stop-Signal Task Performance: Within-Subjects Counterbalanced Comparison Study

Abstract

Background Considered a facet of behavioral impulsivity, response inhibition facilitates adaptive and goal-directed behavior. It is often assessed using the Stop-Signal Task (SST), which is presented on stand-alone computers under controlled laboratory conditions. Sample size may consequently be a function of cost or time and sample diversity constrained to those willing or able to attend the laboratory. Statistical power and generalizability of results might, in turn, be impacted. Such limitations may potentially be overcome via the implementation of web-based testing. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate if there were differences between variables derived from a web-based SST when it was undertaken independently—that is, outside the laboratory, on any computer, and in the absence of researchers—versus when it was performed under laboratory conditions. Methods We programmed a web-based SST in HTML and JavaScript and employed a counterbalanced design. A total of 166 individuals (mean age 19.72, SD 1.85, range 18-36 years; 146/166, 88% female) were recruited. Of them, 79 undertook the independent task prior to visiting the laboratory and 78 completed the independent task following their laboratory visit. The average time between SST testing was 3.72 (SD 2.86) days. Dependent samples and Bayesian paired samples t tests were used to examine differences between laboratory-based and independent SST variables. Correlational analyses were conducted on stop-signal reaction times (SSRT). Results After exclusions, 123 participants (mean age 19.73, SD 1.97 years) completed the SST both in the laboratory and independently. While participants were less accurate on go trials and exhibited reduced inhibitory control when undertaking the independent—compared to the laboratory-based—SST, there was a positive association between the SSRT of each condition (r=.48; P<.001; 95% CI 0.33-0.61). Conclusions Findings suggest a web-based SST, which participants undertake on any computer, at any location, and in the absence of the researcher, is a suitable measure of response inhibition.

A proof-of-concept study exploring the effects of impulsivity on a gamified version of the stop-signal task in children

“…However, it is unknown whether remote administration had any effect on gSST performance, and it could be argued that the casual setting may have contributed to the rate of go-omission errors due to participant distraction. It is possible that the benefits may outweigh disadvantages, especially for those who tend to perform less well in pressured situations, and allow researchers to collect data from a wider, more representative sampling pool ( Assmann et al, 2016 ; Poulton et al, 2022 ). However, future research is required to confirm these observations.…”

Applying network analysis to understand the relationships between impulsivity and social media addiction and between impulsivity and problematic smartphone use

“…A potential explanation for the positive associations between motor impulsivity and conflict, withdrawal, and relapse may lie in the close relationship between motor impulsivity and response inhibition. Prior studies have shown that response inhibition is closely associated with motor impulsivity ( 96 , 97 ). Response inhibition refers to the ability to inhibit inappropriate or irrelevant responses, or resist temptations and resist acting impulsively so as to make flexible and goal-directed behavioral responses ( 98 , 99 ).…”

Impact of personalized alcohol intake and cognitive feedback on alcohol use behavior in hazardous drinkers: A quasi‐randomized trial

“…The web-based SST consists of a practice block of 32 trials and three blocks of 64 experimental trials (Poulton, Chen, et al, 2022). A stop signal in the form of a white box surrounding the go stimuli appears on 25% of randomly selected trials.…”