Previous studies on cocaine use suffer from numerous methodological shortcomings and confounds, such as inadequate screening procedures and controls for age, race, gender distribution, and level of intelligence, lack of a l-Chicoric-acid control group, and more, which makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions from the available data. The design of the present study aimed at fixing these shortcomings. Hence, the present study tested, by means of the wellestablished stop-signal task, whether the recreational intake of cocaine, strictly controlled for confounds, produces deficiencies of inhibitory control. In the standard stop signal task, participants are first presented with a stimulus that signals the execution of a particular response, which may be followed by a stop signal calling for the immediate abortion of that response. Versions of this task have been used to investigate the efficiency to stop various sorts of cognitive processes and so performance on it can be considered to diagnose the individual efficiency of actively inhibiting one��s ����thoughts and actions����. Recent neuroimaging as well as lesion studies have provided compelling evidence for the involvement of the right inferior frontal cortex in the act of inhibiting responses in the stop signal paradigm. Individuals that stopped faster to stop signals displayed more activity in the rIFC as well as in the right subthalamic nucleus, a region in the basal ganglia, compared to slower inhibitors. These findings were interpreted to suggest a neuroanatomical substrate of stop-signal inhibition, involving a loop between rIFC and STN In our version of the task, participants responded to the direction of a green arrow by pressing a button with the left or right index finger. The stop signal was a sudden and unpredictable change of the arrow to red, signalling a aurantiamide-acetate deliberate effort to refrain from responding. The performance in the stop-signal paradigm can be conceptualized in terms of a race, in which the stopping process and the go process compete to finish first. If the stop process finishes before the go process, the response is inhibited. By contrast, if the go process finishes before the stop process, the response isexecuted.