Inhibition difficulties in preterm children: Developmental delay or persistent deficit?

Among executive functions (EFs), research has highlighted specific inhibition difficulties in preterm children. The present paper reviews and classifies the studies that assessed response inhibition and interference control abilities in preterm children and adolescents aged 3 to 16 years. Most behavioral studies agree on a developmental delay at early school age in inhibition abilities and a catch-up before adolescence, with lesser response inhibition difficulties at pre-adolescence. However, persisting interference control difficulties have been reported into early adulthood. These results are discussed, along with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) findings. Finally, this paper outlines methodological issues that need to be overcome in order to define the developmental trajectory of inhibition abilities in the preterm population.     

Inhibition Tasks Are Not Associated with a Variety of Behaviours in College Students

Executive functions are (EF) top-down control processes involved in regulating thoughts, ignoring distractions, and inhibiting impulses. It is widely believed that these processes are critical to self-control and, therefore, that performance on behavioural task measures of EF should be associated with individual differences in everyday life outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to test this assumption, focusing on the core executive function facet of inhibition. A sample of 463 undergraduates completed five laboratory inhibition tasks, along with three self-report measures of self-control and 28 self-report measures of life outcomes. Results showed that although most of the life outcome measures were associated with self-reported self-control, only one of the outcomes was associated with inhibition task performance at the latent-variable level, and this association was in the unexpected direction. Furthermore, few associations were found at the individual task level. These findings challenge the criterion validity of lab-based inhibition tasks. More generally, when considered alongside the known lack of convergent validity between inhibition tasks and self-report measures of self-control, the findings cast doubt on the task's construct validity as measures of self-control processes. Potential methodological and theoretical reasons for the poor performance of laboratory-based inhibition tasks are discussed. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Brief report: Response inhibition and processing speed in children with motor difficulties and developmental coordination disorder

A previous study reported that children with poor motor skills, classified as having motor difficulties (MD) or Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD), produced more errors in a motor response inhibition task compared to typically developing (TD) children but did not differ in verbal inhibition errors. The present study investigated whether these groups differed in the length of time they took to respond in order to achieve these levels of accuracy, and whether any differences in response speed could be explained by generally slow information processing in children with poor motor skills. Timing data from the Verbal Inhibition Motor Inhibition test were analyzed to identify differences in performance between the groups on verbal and motor inhibition, as well as on processing speed measures from standardized batteries. Although children with MD and DCD produced more errors in the motor inhibition task than TD children, the current analyses found that they did not take longer to complete the task. Children with DCD were slower at inhibiting verbal responses than TD children, while the MD group seemed to perform at an intermediate level between the other groups in terms of verbal inhibition speed. Slow processing speed did not account for these group differences. Results extended previous research into response inhibition in children with poor motor skills by explicitly comparing motor and verbal responses, and suggesting that slow performance, even when accurate, may be attributable to an inefficient way of inhibiting responses, rather than slow information processing speed per se.     

Mechanisms for the object-based negative compatibility effect: voluntary versus involuntary inhibition

This study investigates whether the object-based negative compatibility effect (NCE) originates from involuntary or voluntary inhibition. We hypothesised that both supraliminally presented primes (the prime is a mug with its handle pointing either left or right) and experimental instructions (i.e., ignoring the prime) in previous studies might induce participants to develop a voluntarily inhibitory strategy that is responsible for the object-based NCE. To test this hypothesis, we conducted 3 experiments. Experiment 1 confirmed a suitable paradigm. Experiment 2 altered participants’ strategies by varying the frequency of compatible trials across blocks. The results revealed a significant NCE for the low-frequency condition, which suggested that voluntary strategy might be primarily responsible for the object-based NCE. Experiment 3 combined a free-choice target with an object-based NCE paradigm. The results showed equivalent frequencies and mean response times between the free-choice responses that corresponded to or were opposite from the orientations of the mug handle. Combined with the results of response time quartiles, which revealed NCEs in fast responses (Q1–Q3) but no compatibility effect in slow (Q4) responses, we concluded that the object-based NCE might be primarily based on voluntary inhibition. Moreover, this inhibition might take effect earlier than that of the arrow-based NCE.     

Time and interference: Effects on working memory

This study tested predictions from the time‐based resource‐sharing (TBRS) model with a classical verbal working memory (WM) task, where target and non‐target information interfere strongly with each other. Different predictions can be formulated according to the dominant perspectives (TBRS and interference hypothesis) on the role of inhibitory control in WM task performance. Here, we aimed to trace the activation of irrelevant information, examining priming effects in a lexical decision task immediately following WM recall. Results indicate the roles of both time and interference constraints in determining task performance. In particular, the role of time available seemed crucial at the highest WM loads (i.e., 3 and 4 memoranda). These were also associated with a higher activation of no‐longer‐relevant information but, in this case, independently from time available for processing.     

The discrepant effect of acute stress on cognitive inhibition and response inhibition

This study aimed to investigate how acute stress impinges on individual’s cognitive inhibition and response inhibition abilities. Electroencephalography was adopted when 35 healthy adult females performing the No Go Flanker task before and after the Trier Social Stress Test. Both inhibition processes evoked N2 and P3 components, but only the response inhibition evoked the late positive potential (LPP), indicating the response inhibition needed continuous cognitive effort to inhibit the prepotent response. The N2 and the P3 amplitudes were decreased, while the LPP amplitudes were increased under acute stress. These results suggested that acute stress caused the detrimental effect by occupying cognitive resources. Contrastingly, individuals actively regulated and made more efforts to counteract the detrimental effect of acute stress on response inhibition. Thus, acute stress impaired cognitive inhibition but did not affect response inhibition.     

Collaboration and prospective memory: comparing nominal and collaborative group performance in strangers and couples

To perform prospective memory (PM) tasks in day-to-day life, we often enlist the help of others. Yet the effects of collaboration on PM are largely unknown. Adopting the methodology of the “collaborative recall paradigm”, we tested whether stranger dyads (Experiment 1) and intimate couples (Experiment 2) would perform better on a “Virtual Week” task when working together or each working separately. In Experiment 1, we found evidence of collaborative inhibition: collaborating strangers did not perform to their pooled individual potential, although the effect was modulated by PM task difficulty. We also found that the overall collaborative inhibition effect was attributable to both the retrospective and prospective components of PM. In Experiment 2 however, there was no collaborative inhibition: there was no significant difference in performance between couples working together or separately. Our findings suggest potential costs of collaboration to PM. Intimate relationships may reduce the usual costs of collaboration, with implications for intervention training programmes and for populations who most need PM support.