TEST

Speed and impulsivity (Go/No-Go)

Sustained attention and inhibitory control

Inspired by the SART paradigm, it measures the ability to inhibit an automatic response. It makes it possible to detect impulsivity, self-control failures, and the “lapses” characteristic of ADHD, frontal damage, or after a stroke.

Request a demo

← Back to SPAIn battery

1–9

GO DIGITS

3

NO-GO DIGIT

10%

NO-GO STIMULI

45

MAX. CORRECT RESPONSES

WHAT THE TEST IS

Press every time… except when 3 appears

Inspired by the SART paradigm (Robertson et al., 1997), this task belongs to the Go/No-Go family. The user must respond every time a digit between 1 and 9 appears (Go) and inhibit the response when the number 3 appears (No-Go, 10% of stimuli).

It is used as a measure of strategy, inhibition of automatic responses, motor impulsivity, sustained attention, and processing speed. The low frequency of No-Go stimuli creates an automatic tendency to press, making the test especially sensitive to inhibitory control failures.

HOW IT IS ADMINISTERED

Maintain attention and stop the automatic response

The user sees a sequence of digits from 1 to 9 appear in the center of the screen and must press as quickly as possible for any of them, except when a 3 appears, at which point they must hold back and not respond. The automation of the response makes inhibiting the response to 3 demanding.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Indicators and their interpretation

Correct responses (Go)

Total correct responses to Go stimuli (max. 45). Main index of overall performance.

High: good sustained attention and discrimination.
Low: fluctuations, attentional disconnections, difficulties discriminating Go stimuli.

Omissions

Times the user does not respond to a Go stimulus. Inverse index of attentional performance.

High: sustained attention difficulties, fatigue, lapses.
Low: constant and effective sustained attention.

False alarms (No-Go)

Key indicator of impulsivity. Keypresses when the number 3 appears (the response should be inhibited).

High: impulsivity, inhibitory control deficit.
Low: good inhibitory control and response monitoring.

RT in correct responses

Mean time (ms) of correct response to Go stimuli. Processing speed under sustained attention.

Slow: excessive caution, slowing, fatigue.
Fast: possible impulsivity (usually accompanied by false alarms); if there are no errors, excellent performance.

RT variability

SD of RTs in correct responses. Consistency of processing speed.

High: attentional fluctuations, inconsistent motor control.
Low: stable execution.

RT fatigue

Increase in RT throughout the task (final 25% minus initial 25%).

High: fatigue, gradual loss of attentional efficiency.
Low: maintenance or positive adjustment (automation).

Speed-accuracy tradeoff

Relationship between mean RT and proportion of correct responses. The user’s response strategy.

High: bias toward speed or accuracy.
Low: optimal balance between the two.

Learning rate

Variation in RT in the first 10 trials. Initial adaptation.

Positive: adjustment difficulty, early fatigue.
Negative or zero: rapid adaptation or normal “warm-up.”

REFERENCES

Bibliography

Robertson, I. H., Manly, T., Andrade, J., Baddeley, B. T., & Yiend, J. (1997). ‘Oops!’: Performance correlates of everyday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia, 35(6), 747–758.

EXPLORE OTHER TESTS