Cognitive Control in Children

Bub, Daniel N.; Masson, Michael E. J.; Lalonde, Christopher E.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01710.x

Cited by 96 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, results similar to ours were obtained by Lamers et al (2010) and Pratte et al (2010). Bub et al (2006) obtained evidence suggesting that younger children (7-9 years) engage in stronger inhibition than older children (9 -11 years) in a vocal Stroop task. Perhaps participants do not need to strongly suppress word-reading when they grow older, as is suggested by our results for adult participants.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…But as described above, whereas some earlier studies (e.g., Bub et al, 2006) found evidence for the involvement of selective inhibition in the Stroop task, others did not (e.g., Soutschek et al, 2013). The latter studies and the present findings suggest that successful Stroop task performance might depend on other control abilities than selective inhibition (see Roelofs, 2003).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…If the presence of explicit distractors is sufficient for triggering selective inhibition, one would expect selective inhibition to be involved in the Stroop task (Bub et al, 2006;Sharma et al, 2010). Consequently, one should see similar results for the Stroop task as for the picture-word interference task: There should be an interference effect, the size of which should depend on the participants' inhibitory control ability, indexed by the slope of the slowest segment of the delta plots.…”

Section: Abstract: Selective Inhibition Picture-word Interference Smentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color–word Stroop tasks.

Shao

Roelofs

Martin

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2 studies, we examined whether explicit distractors are necessary and sufficient to evoke selective inhibition in 3 naming tasks: the semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color-word Stroop task. Delta plots were used to quantify the size of the interference effects as a function of reaction time (RT). Selective inhibition was operationalized as the decrease in the size of the interference effect as a function of naming RT. For all naming tasks, mean naming RTs were significantly longer in the interference condition than in the control condition. The slopes of the interference effects for the longest naming RTs correlated with the magnitude of the mean interference effect in both the semantic blocking task and the picture-word interference task, suggesting that selective inhibition was involved to reduce the interference from strong semantic competitors either invoked by a single explicit competitor or strong implicit competitors in picture naming. However, there was no correlation between the slopes and the mean interference effect in the Stroop task, suggesting less importance of selective inhibition in this task despite explicit distractors. Whereas the results of the semantic blocking task suggest that an explicit distractor is not necessary for triggering inhibition, the results of the Stroop task suggest that such a distractor is not sufficient for evoking inhibition either.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Abstract: Selective Inhibition Picture-word Interference Smentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color–word Stroop tasks.

Shao

Roelofs

Martin

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…slope between the last two bins) provides the most sensitive metric of the proficiency of inhibitory control over conflicting motor impulses, an assertion supported empirically across several studies using both non-clinical and clinical populations (Burle et al, 2002; Ridderinkhof et al, 2005; Bub et al, 2006; Wijnen and Ridderinkhof, 2007; Wylie et al, 2009a, b, 2010a, b, 2005; for review, see van den Wildenberg et al, 2010). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Focused stimulation of dorsal subthalamic nucleus improves reactive inhibitory control of action impulses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frontal-basal ganglia circuitry dysfunction caused by Parkinson’s disease impairs important executive cognitive processes, such as the ability to inhibit impulsive action tendencies. Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson’s disease improves the reactive inhibition of impulsive actions that interfere with goal-directed behavior. An unresolved question is whether this effect depends on stimulation of a particular Subthalamic Nucleus subregion. The current study aimed to 1) replicate previous findings and additionally investigate the effect of chronic versus acute Subthalamic Nucleus stimulation on inhibitory control in Parkinson’s disease patients off dopaminergic medication 2) test whether stimulating Subthalamic Nucleus subregions differentially modulate proactive response control and the proficiency of reactive inhibitory control. In the first experiment, twelve Parkinson’s disease patients completed three sessions of the Simon task, Off Deep brain stimulation and medication, on acute Deep Brain Stimulation and on chronic Deep Brain Stimulation. Experiment 2 consisted of 11 Parkinson’s disease patients with Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation (off medication) who completed two testing sessions involving of a Simon task either with stimulation of the dorsal or the ventral contact in the Subthalamic Nucleus. Our findings show that Deep Brain Stimulation improves reactive inhibitory control, regardless of medication and regardless of whether it concerns chronic or acute Subthalamic Nucleus stimulation. More importantly, selective stimulation of dorsal and ventral subregions of the Subthalamic Nucleus indicates that especially the dorsal Subthalamic Nucleus circuitries are crucial for modulating the reactive inhibitory control of motor actions.

show abstract

“…According to the activation–suppression hypothesis, the engagement and build up of selective suppression of direct response activation can be observed by plotting the interference effect as a function of the entire RT distribution (i.e., delta plots). In particular, the modulation of the interference effect at the slowest segments of the distribution, where inhibition is expected to be fully engaged, is sensitive to group differences in the efficiency of inhibitory control (Bub, Masson, & Lalonde, 2006; Ridderinkhof, Scheres, Oosterlaan, & Sergeant, 2005; Wylie, Ridderinkhof, Eckerle, & Manning, 2007). Guided by this framework and the proposed role of the basal ganglia during action selection, we predicted that PD patients would show reduced selective suppression of incongruent responses when instructions emphasized speed of responding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of speed-accuracy strategy on response interference control in Parkinson's disease

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies that used conflict paradigms such as the Eriksen Flanker task show that many individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) have pronounced difficulty resolving the conflict that arises from the simultaneous activation of mutually exclusive responses. This finding fits well with contemporary views that postulate a key role for the basal ganglia in action selection. The present experiment aims to specify the cognitive processes that underlie action selection deficits among PD patients in the context of variations in speed-accuracy strategy. PD patients (n = 28) and healthy controls (n = 17) performed an arrow version of the flanker task under task instructions that either emphasized speed or accuracy of responses. Reaction time (RT) and accuracy rates decreased with speed compared to accuracy instructions, although to a lesser extent for the PD group. Differences in flanker interference effects among PD and healthy controls depended on speed-accuracy strategy. Compared to the healthy controls, PD patients showed larger flanker interference effects under speed stress. RT distribution analyses suggested that PD patients have greater difficulty suppressing incorrect response activation when pressing for speed. These initial findings point to an important interaction between strategic and computational aspects of interference control in accounting for cognitive impairments of PD. The results are also compatible with recent brain imaging studies that demonstrate basal ganglia activity to co-vary with speed-accuracy adjustments.

show abstract

Cognitive Control in Children

Cited by 96 publications

References 26 publications

Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color–word Stroop tasks.

Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, picture-word interference, and color–word Stroop tasks.

Focused stimulation of dorsal subthalamic nucleus improves reactive inhibitory control of action impulses

The effect of speed-accuracy strategy on response interference control in Parkinson's disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About