Commentary: What's in a word (or words) – on the relations among self‐regulation, self‐control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk‐taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology – reflections on Nigg (2017)

Abstract

In Nigg’s excellent article, he deals with a variety of complex conceptual issues related to the constructs of self-regulation and executive functioning. Overall, I agree that the terminology proposed by Nigg should be adopted; moreover, the conceptual distinctions he provides should help the field to move forward in regard to the understanding of varied constructs related to self-regulation. In the spirit of further clarification, I questioned Nigg’s suggestions that (a) working memory should be considered as part of the construct of top-down regulation, (b) that planning is a higher-level component of executive functioning but not part of effortful control. In addition, I discussed my perspective on the role of automaticity in defining top-down versus bottom-up self-regulatory processes and the role of flexibility in top-down self-regulatory processes and their relation to personality resiliency.

Common mechanisms of executive attention underlie executive function and effortful control in children

“…The strong empirical association between the EF and EC factors was not attributable to informant bias, as we used both the self‐ and parent‐report EATQ‐R to measure EC. These results assist in clarifying the nature of the proposed conceptual and empirical overlap between EF and EC in children, revealing they are likely the same construct when measured using behavioral ratings (Bridgett et al, ; Eisenberg, ; Nigg, ; Zhou et al, ). Until recently, temperament researchers and cognitive psychologists have investigated self‐regulation under distinct rubrics and with a focus on different outcome criteria (Zhou et al, ).…”

“…We have provided direct empirical support for the proposed correspondence between EF, specifically working memory and response inhibition, and EC through common mechanisms of executive attention (Nigg, ; Zhou et al, ). These findings may assist in clarifying some of the ongoing confusion regarding the conceptual and empirical overlap between these two domains (Eisenberg, ; Nigg, ; Zhou et al, ). Our results also support previous proposals that executive attention is the common cognitive mechanism underlying a broad range of higher‐order cognitive processes and encourages a more parsimonious approach to developmental self‐regulation research (Ilkowska & Engle, ; Kane & Engle, ; Kaplan & Berman, ; McCabe et al, ).…”

“…Some researchers have contended that EF and EC are overlapping constructs (Bridgett, Oddi, Laake, Murdock, & Bachmann, ; Holzman & Bridgett, ; Nigg, ; Zhou et al, ). Others have argued they are conceptually and empirically distinct and are differentially related to developmental psychopathology, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Eisenberg, ; Samyn, Roeyers, Bijttebier, Rosseel, & Wiersema, ). Here, we propose that executive attention ‐ a limited‐capacity attentional resource subserving the goal‐directed control of cognition and behavior ‐ is the common cognitive mechanism underlying EF and EC and can explain their conceptual and empirical overlap.…”

“…Despite the apparent convergence of EF and EC (Holzman & Bridgett, ; Nigg, ; Zhou et al, ), some theorists contend they are conceptually and empirically distinct (Eisenberg, ; Samyn et al, ). Unfortunately, there is a paucity of empirical studies that have directly tested the overlap between EC and EF (Bridgett et al, ; Lin, Liew, & Perez, ; Samyn et al, ).…”

Effortful Control – A Transdiagnostic Dimension Underlying Internalizing and Externalizing Psychopathology

“…executive functioning. A better delineation between the different neuropsychological constructs and their assessment methods is badly needed to further explore the details and subtleties of the underlying mechanisms in psychopathology [17,106].…”