Skip to main content

Go/No-Go Task

Version: v1 (current)

The Go/No-Go task is a fundamental measure of response inhibition and impulse control in cognitive psychology. Participants respond rapidly to frequent "Go" stimuli while withholding responses to infrequent "No-Go" stimuli, creating a prepotent response tendency that must be inhibited.

Overview

Response inhibition is a core executive function that enables us to suppress inappropriate or unwanted actions. The Go/No-Go task creates conflict by establishing a dominant response pattern (responding to Go trials) and then requiring occasional inhibition (No-Go trials). This simple paradigm has proven invaluable for studying impulse control, attention deficits, and frontal lobe function across clinical and healthy populations.

The task is particularly sensitive to individual differences in impulsivity and has been widely used to study ADHD, substance abuse, aging effects, and other conditions affecting executive control. By manipulating the frequency of No-Go trials, researchers can adjust task difficulty and examine how inhibitory demands affect performance.

Scientific Background

Key Findings:

  • Response Inhibition Model: Go/No-Go tasks engage frontal-basal ganglia circuits, particularly the right inferior frontal cortex and pre-supplementary motor area
  • Error Types: Commission errors (false alarms on No-Go trials) reflect inhibition failures; omission errors (misses on Go trials) reflect attention lapses
  • No-Go Frequency Effects: Lower No-Go frequency (e.g., 20%) makes inhibition harder by strengthening the prepotent Go response
  • Speed-Accuracy Trade-off: Faster responses on Go trials often predict more commission errors, revealing the cost of rapid responding

Theoretical Framework: The task taps into proactive and reactive control mechanisms. Proactive control involves anticipatory adjustments (e.g., slowing down when No-Go trials are expected), while reactive control involves last-moment inhibition when a No-Go stimulus appears.

Seminal References:

  • Donders (1969): Early work on choice reaction time and response inhibition
  • Schachar & Logan (1990): Foundations of inhibitory control measurement
  • Aron et al. (2014): Neural basis of response inhibition

Why Researchers Use This Task

Researchers choose the Go/No-Go task to:

  • Assess impulse control in ADHD, substance use disorders, and aging
  • Study frontal lobe function and executive control development
  • Examine speed-accuracy trade-offs in decision-making
  • Measure effects of interventions (medications, training, brain stimulation) on inhibition
  • Investigate individual differences in impulsivity and self-regulation
  • Screen for attention deficits in clinical or research settings

Configuration Options

Response Mode

ParameterTypeDefaultDescription
Time-based trialsbooleanTrueIf enabled, trials auto-advance after stimulus duration. If disabled, participant must click a button to advance (useful for self-paced practice).

Visual Parameters

ParameterTypeDefaultDescription
Font size (px)number96Size of stimulus text in pixels (range: 8-400).

Timing Parameters

ParameterTypeDefaultDescription
Fixation duration (ms)number500Duration of fixation cross before stimulus appears.
Stimulus duration (ms)number2000How long stimulus is displayed (minimum 50ms). In time-based mode, this is also the response deadline.

Practice Trials

ParameterTypeDefaultDescription
Enable practicebooleanFalseEnable practice trials with visual feedback (green checkmark for correct, red X for incorrect).
Practice trialsarray[]Array of practice trial configurations (same structure as main trials).

Keyboard Shortcuts

Researchers can customize the keyboard bindings used during the task:

ParameterTypeDefaultDescription
Show keyboard hintbooleanTrueDisplay an on-screen hint showing the configured key
Go keykeySpaceKey for responding to Go trials
Go action labeltext"for Go trials"Label shown in the keyboard hint

Instructions

Four instruction types are available:

Instruction TypeDescription
Main instructionsShown before task starts on a dedicated page with camera/screenshare preview.
Hint instructionsQuick reference shown via "?" button during task execution.
Practice instructionsShown before practice trials begin (if practice enabled).
Trials instructionsShown after practice, before main trials (if practice enabled).

Trial Configuration

Each trial in the trials spreadsheet is defined by:

ColumnTypeRequiredDescription
stimulusstringYesCharacter or word to display (e.g., "O", "X", "GO", "STOP").
typeGo or NogoYesTrial type: respond (Go) or withhold (Nogo).
fixation_msnumberNoFixation duration override for this trial (default: 500ms).
stimulus_msnumberNoStimulus duration override for this trial (default: 2000ms).
blockstringNoOptional block label for grouping trials in analysis.

Example Trial Sheet

stimulus  | type  | fixation_ms | stimulus_ms | block
----------|-------|-------------|-------------|-------
O | go | 500 | 1000 | main
O | go | 500 | 1000 | main
X | nogo | 500 | 1000 | main
O | go | 500 | 1000 | main
O | go | 500 | 1000 | main
X | nogo | 500 | 1000 | main

Design Tips:

  • No-Go Frequency: Use 20–30% No-Go trials to create inhibitory demand without excessive difficulty.
  • Trial Order: Randomize or pseudorandomize to prevent anticipatory patterns.
  • Stimulus Duration: 500–2000ms is typical; shorter durations increase difficulty.
  • Balanced Blocks: Consider separate blocks with different No-Go frequencies to examine context effects.

Participant Experience

Unmoderated/Moderated Mode

  1. Main Instructions: Participant reads task instructions and clicks "Start"
  2. Practice Phase (if enabled):
    • Practice instructions appear
    • Practice trials with visual feedback (✓ or ✗)
    • Feedback shows after each response or timeout
  3. Trials Instructions (if practice was enabled): Brief reminder before main trials
  4. Main Trials:
    • Fixation cross (if configured)
    • Stimulus appears (e.g., "O" for Go, "X" for No-Go)
    • Go trials: Press spacebar (or click "Go" button if not time-based)
    • No-Go trials: Do nothing (withhold response)
    • No feedback during main trials
  5. Completion: Task ends after all trials

Strictly Moderated Mode

Same flow, but researcher controls advancement via moderator dashboard. Participant cannot advance trials independently.

Response Methods

  • Keyboard: Press spacebar to respond on Go trials (default -- configurable by researcher)
  • Button: Click "Go" button (only visible in non-time-based mode)
  • No-Go: Simply wait for the trial to end without pressing anything

All keyboard bindings are configurable by the researcher in the study configuration. The keys listed above are the defaults.

Data Output

Participation Log Events

The task logs high-resolution events for each trial:

Trial Start (gonogo_trial_start):

{
"trial_index": 1,
"stimulus_id": "gonogo_0_1",
"stimulus": "O",
"type": "go",
"block": "main",
"fixation_ms": 500,
"stimulus_ms": 1000
}

Stimulus Onset (gonogo_stimulus):

{
"trial_index": 1,
"stimulus_id": "gonogo_0_1",
"stimulus": "O",
"type": "go",
"block": "main"
}

Response (gonogo_answer):

{
"trial_index": 1,
"stimulus_id": "gonogo_0_1",
"source": "keyboard",
"raw_key": "Space",
"stimulus": "O",
"type": "go",
"response_value": "go",
"response_correct": true,
"outcome": "hit",
"latency_ms": 456,
"block": "main"
}

Response Outcomes

OutcomeTrial TypeResponseMeaning
HitGoGoCorrect response on Go trial
MissGoNo-GoFailed to respond on Go trial (omission error)
False AlarmNo-GoGoIncorrectly responded on No-Go trial (commission error)
Correct RejectionNo-GoNo-GoCorrectly withheld response on No-Go trial

Summary Artifact

At task completion, a JSON summary is generated (gonogo_summary_<taskIndex>.json):

{
"task_kind": "gonogo",
"task_index": 0,
"total_trials": 40,
"overall": {
"total": 40,
"valid_responses": 40,
"correct": 36,
"accuracy": 0.90,
"mean_rt_ms": 523,
"mean_correct_rt_ms": 512,
"timeouts": 0,
"hits": 28,
"misses": 2,
"false_alarms": 2,
"correct_rejections": 8,
"hit_rate": 0.933,
"false_alarm_rate": 0.20
},
"by_type": {
"go": {
"total": 30,
"correct": 28,
"accuracy": 0.933,
"mean_rt_ms": 523,
"hits": 28,
"misses": 2
},
"nogo": {
"total": 10,
"correct": 8,
"accuracy": 0.80,
"false_alarms": 2,
"correct_rejections": 8,
"false_alarm_rate": 0.20
}
},
"trials": [...]
}

Key Metrics:

  • Hit Rate: Proportion of Go trials with correct responses (should be high)
  • False Alarm Rate: Proportion of No-Go trials with incorrect responses (commission errors)
  • d' (Sensitivity): Can be calculated from hit rate and false alarm rate using signal detection theory
  • Response Time: Faster RT often correlates with higher false alarm rate

Design Recommendations

Trial Counts

  • Minimum: 30 trials (20 Go, 10 No-Go) for basic assessment
  • Standard: 60–120 trials (70–80% Go, 20–30% No-Go)
  • Long: 200+ trials for fine-grained individual differences

Timing Parameters

ParameterRecommended RangeNotes
Fixation duration300–700msAlerts participant to upcoming trial
Stimulus duration500–2000msShorter = harder; 1000ms is common

No-Go Frequency

  • Easy: 40–50% No-Go (balanced, easier inhibition)
  • Moderate: 20–30% No-Go (typical, creates prepotent Go response)
  • Hard: 10–15% No-Go (very rare, very difficult inhibition)

Counterbalancing

Consider:

  • Stimulus-Response Mapping: If using letters, counterbalance which is Go vs. No-Go across participants
  • Block Order: If using multiple blocks with different No-Go frequencies
  • Practice: Ensure practice includes both Go and No-Go trials

Practice Trials

  • Recommended: 10–20 practice trials (70% Go, 30% No-Go)
  • Purpose: Familiarize participants with stimuli and response requirements
  • Feedback: Enable visual feedback during practice only

Common Issues and Solutions

Issue: Too Many Misses on Go Trials

Symptoms: High omission error rate (>10%)

Possible Causes:

  • Stimulus duration too short
  • Participant not understanding instructions
  • Attention lapses

Solutions:

  • Increase stimulus_ms to 1500–2000ms
  • Simplify instructions; emphasize speed of responding on Go trials
  • Add practice trials with feedback
  • Check if participant is fatigued (too many trials)

Issue: Too Many False Alarms on No-Go Trials

Symptoms: False alarm rate >40%

Possible Causes:

  • No-Go trials too rare (strong prepotent Go response)
  • Participant responding too fast (speed-accuracy trade-off)
  • Insufficient practice

Solutions:

  • Increase No-Go frequency to 30–40% to reduce difficulty
  • Add practice trials emphasizing accuracy over speed
  • Lengthen fixation duration to give more preparation time
  • Provide clearer visual distinction between Go and No-Go stimuli

Issue: Task Too Easy (Near-Perfect Performance)

Symptoms: Both hit rate and correct rejection rate >95%

Solutions:

  • Decrease No-Go frequency to 15–20% (make inhibition harder)
  • Shorten stimulus_ms to 500–750ms (reduce response time)
  • Use more similar Go/No-Go stimuli (e.g., "X" vs. "X+" instead of "O" vs. "X")

Issue: High Variability in Response Times

Symptoms: RT standard deviation >300ms

Possible Causes:

  • Participant strategy switching (sometimes fast, sometimes careful)
  • Distractions in environment

Solutions:

  • Emphasize consistent responding in instructions
  • Ensure quiet testing environment
  • Remove outlier trials (e.g., RT <100ms or >2000ms) from analysis

Example Study Configurations

Configuration 1: Standard Inhibition Assessment

Purpose: Basic inhibition screening

Settings:

  • Total trials: 60
  • Go trials: 42 (70%)
  • No-Go trials: 18 (30%)
  • Stimulus duration: 1000ms
  • Fixation duration: 500ms
  • Practice: 12 trials with feedback

Expected Performance:

  • Hit rate: 85–95%
  • False alarm rate: 15–30%
  • Mean RT: 400–600ms

Configuration 2: High Inhibitory Demand

Purpose: Challenging inhibition for high-functioning adults

Settings:

  • Total trials: 100
  • Go trials: 80 (80%)
  • No-Go trials: 20 (20%)
  • Stimulus duration: 750ms
  • Fixation duration: 400ms
  • Practice: 20 trials

Expected Performance:

  • Hit rate: 90–98%
  • False alarm rate: 25–45% (higher due to strong Go prepotency)
  • Mean RT: 350–500ms

Configuration 3: Developmental Study (Children)

Purpose: Adapted for children ages 7–12

Settings:

  • Total trials: 40 (shorter session)
  • Go trials: 28 (70%)
  • No-Go trials: 12 (30%)
  • Stimulus duration: 1500ms (longer response window)
  • Fixation duration: 700ms
  • Stimuli: Simple shapes or emojis instead of letters
  • Practice: 16 trials with extensive feedback

Expected Performance (varies by age):

  • Hit rate: 75–90% (younger = lower)
  • False alarm rate: 30–50% (younger = higher)

Configuration 4: Context Effects Study

Purpose: Examine how No-Go frequency affects inhibition

Settings:

  • Block 1 (High No-Go): 50% No-Go (30 trials)
  • Block 2 (Low No-Go): 10% No-Go (30 trials)
  • Compare false alarm rates and RT across blocks
  • Counterbalance block order across participants

Hypothesis: Lower No-Go frequency (Block 2) should increase false alarms due to stronger prepotent response.

References

  1. Aron, A. R., Robbins, T. W., & Poldrack, R. A. (2014). Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex: One decade on. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(4), 177–185.

  2. Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Gray, J. R., Molfese, D. L., & Snyder, A. (2001). Anterior cingulate cortex and response conflict: Effects of frequency, inhibition and errors. Cerebral Cortex, 11(9), 825–836.

  3. Donders, F. C. (1969). On the speed of mental processes. Acta Psychologica, 30, 412–431. (Original work published 1868)

  4. Schachar, R., & Logan, G. D. (1990). Impulsivity and inhibitory control in normal development and childhood psychopathology. Developmental Psychology, 26(5), 710–720.

  5. Simmonds, D. J., Pekar, J. J., & Mostofsky, S. H. (2008). Meta-analysis of Go/No-go tasks demonstrating that fMRI activation associated with response inhibition is task-dependent. Neuropsychologia, 46(1), 224–232.


Related Tasks: Flanker Task, Stroop Task, Stop-Signal Task