Behavior Research Methods

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 479–483 | Cite as

STOP-IT: Windows executable software for the stop-signal paradigm

  • Frederick VerbruggenEmail author
  • Gordon D. LoganEmail author
  • Michaël A. Stevens


The stop-signal paradigm is a useful tool for the investigation of response inhibition. In this paradigm, subjects are instructed to respond as fast as possible to a stimulus unless a stop signal is presented after a variable delay. However, programming the stop-signal task is typically considered to be difficult. To overcome this issue, we present software called STOP-IT, for running the stop-signal task, as well as an additional analyzing program called ANALYZE-IT. The main advantage of both programs is that they are a precompiled executable, and for basic use there is no need for additional programming. STOP-IT and ANALYZE-IT are completely based on free software, are distributed under the GNU General Public License, and are available at the personal Web sites of the first two authors or at


Stop Signal Configuration File Race Model Instruction File Output Folder 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Band, G. P. H., van der Molen, M. W., & Logan, G. D. (2003). Horserace model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. Acta Psychologica, 112, 105–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boucher, L., Palmeri, T. J., Logan, G. D., & Schall, J. D. (2007). Inhibitory control in mind and brain: An interactive race model of countermanding saccades. Psychological Review, 114, 376–397.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Jennings, J. R., van der Molen, M. W., Pelham, W., Brock Debski, K., & Hoza, B. (1997). Inhibition in boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as indexed by heart rate change. Developmental Psychology, 33, 308–318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kramer, A. F., Humphrey, D. G., Larish, J. F., Logan, G. D., & Strayer, D. L. (1994). Aging and inhibition: Beyond a unitary view of inhibitory processing in attention. Psychology & Aging, 9, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lappin, J. S., & Eriksen, C. W. (1966). Use of a delayed signal to stop a visual reaction-time response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 805–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A user’s guide to the stop signal paradigm. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr, Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 189–239). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Logan, G. D., & Cowan, W. B. (1984). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91, 295–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Logan, G. D., Cowan, W. B., & Davis, K. A. (1984). On the ability to inhibit simple and choice reaction time responses: A model and a method. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 276–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Logan, G. D., Schachar, R. J., & Tannock, R. (1997). Impulsivity and inhibitory control. Psychological Science, 8, 60–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Osman, A., Kornblum, S., & Meyer, D. E. (1986). The point of no return in choice reaction time: Controlled and ballistic stages of response preparation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 12, 243–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schachar, R., & Logan, G. [D.] (1990). Are hyperactive children deficient in attentional capacity? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, 493–513.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Stevens, M., Lammertyn, J., Verbruggen, F., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Tscope: A C library for programming cognitive experiments on the MS Windows platform. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 280–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Verbruggen, F., & De Houwer, J. (2007). Do emotional stimuli interfere with response inhibition? Evidence from the stop signal paradigm. Cognition & Emotion, 21, 391–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., Notebaert, W., & Vandierendonck, A. (2005). Effects of stimulus-stimulus compatibility and stimulus-response compatibility on response inhibition. Acta Psychologica, 120, 307–326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006a). The effect of interference in the early processing stages on response inhibition in the stop signal task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 190–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006b). Selective stopping in task switching: The role of response selection and response execution. Experimental Psychology, 53, 48–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Verbruggen, F., Logan, G. D., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2008). Short-term aftereffects of response inhibition: Repetition priming or between-trial control adjustments? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vince, M. A. (1948). The intermittency of control movements and the psychological refractory period. British Journal of Psychology, 38, 149–157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Williams, B. R., Ponesse, J. S., Schachar, R. J., Logan, G. D., & Tannock, R. (1999). Development of inhibitory control across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 35, 205–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyVanderbilt UniversityNashville
  2. 2.Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations