The Ontogeny of Inhibition Mechanisms: A Renewed Approach to Cognitive Development

Harnishfeger, Katherine Kipp; Bjorklund, David F.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-9220-0_2

Cited by 150 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

121

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, the aim of the present study was to formally explore if the pattern of performance presented by elderly subjects and AD patients is in agreement with the theoretical framework proposed by Kipp Harnishfeger [45,46,104], distinguishing between the concepts of inhibition and interference. As indicated previously, inhibitory control corresponds to a voluntary/conscious suppression of the information classified as irrelevant for the ongoing task, and interference resolution represents an automatic gating mechanism occurring prior to conscious awareness and preventing the processing of distracting information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…More generally, Nigg [81] suggested dissociating effortful inhibitory processes (for example, cognitive inhibition, behavioral inhibition and oculo-motor inhibition) from automatic inhibition of attention (concerning inhibition of irrelevant spatial localizations or of recently inspected stimuli). Finally, Kipp Harnishfeger [45,46,104], on the basis of task-analyses, proposed to distinguish between the concepts of inhibition and interference. In that theoretical framework, inhibitory control corresponds to a voluntary suppression of the information, and interference resolution represents a gating mechanism preventing the processing of distracting information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Changes in inhibitory / interference resolution abilities have been reported across the entire life span [e.g., 45,46]. During normal aging, larger Stroop effects were observed, indicating difficulties suppressing an overlearned response (e.g., reading) in order to produce a less-practiced response (e.g., naming) [37,47,57,64,94].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Specificity of inhibitory deficits in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease

Collette

Schmidt

Scherrer

et al. 2009

Neurobiology of Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deficits of suppression abilities are frequently observed in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease.However, few studies have explored these deficits in the two populations simultaneously using a large battery of tasks. The aim of the present study was to explore if the pattern of performance presented by elderly subjects and AD patients is in agreement with theoretical frameworks [104; see also 81], distinguishing between the concepts of inhibition (a voluntary suppression of irrelevant information) and interference (an automatic suppression process occurring prior to conscious awareness). The results obtained demonstrated that (1) there is an alteration of the inhibitory process in normal elderly subjects; (2) inhibitory and interference resolution processes are quantitately less efficient in AD, since these patients present a correct performance only for information which leaves weak traces in memory.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Specificity of inhibitory deficits in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease

Collette

Schmidt

Scherrer

et al. 2009

Neurobiology of Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ability to override competing actions is a key component of cognitive functioning (Kahneman et al, 1983;Baddeley, 1986;Shallice, 1988;Cohen and Servan-Schreiber, 1992;Desimone and Duncan, 1995); it becomes more efficient with age (Harnishfeger and Bjorkland, 1993). In other words, immature cognition is characterized by greater susceptibility to interference from competing actions (Diamond, 1990;Brainerd and Reyna, 1993;Dempster, 1993;Casey et al, 2001Casey et al, , 2002Munakata and Yerys, 2001), as evidenced in children when performing Stroopinterference tasks (Tipper et al, 1989), card sorting (Zelazo et al, 1996;Munakata and Yerys 2001), and go-no-go tasks (Luria, 1961; Casey et al, 1997a,b;Vaidya et al, 1998).…”

Section: Abstract: Development; Basal Ganglia; Hippocampus; Imaging;mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociating Striatal and Hippocampal Function Developmentally with a Stimulus–Response Compatibility Task

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study examined the development of cognitive and neural systems involved in overriding a learned action in favor of a new one using a stimulus-response compatibility task and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Eight right-handed adults (mean age, 22-30 years), and eight children (7-11 years) were scanned while they performed a task. Both children and adults were less accurate for incompatible stimulus-response mappings than compatible ones; the children's performance was significantly worse. The comparison of the incompatible and compatible conditions showed large volumes of activity in the ventral prefrontal cortex, ventral caudate nucleus, thalamus, and hippocampus. Striatal activity correlated with the percentage of errors in overriding the old stimulus-response association. The hippocampal activity correlated with the reaction time to make a response to a new stimulus-response mapping that required the reversal of a prior association between a stimulus and a response location. Developmental differences were observed in the volume of striatal/pallidal and hippocampal/parahippocampal activity in that these regions were larger and extended more ventrally in children relative to adults. These results suggest that with maturation and learning, projections to and from these regions may become more refined and focal. Moreover, these findings are consistent with the role of ventral frontostriatal circuitry in overriding habitual and well learned actions and hippocampal systems in learning and reversing associations between a given stimulus and spatial location. Key words: development; basal ganglia; hippocampus; imaging; learning; fMRI; childrenThe ability to override competing actions is a key component of cognitive functioning (Kahneman et al., 1983;Baddeley, 1986;Shallice, 1988;Cohen and Servan-Schreiber, 1992;Desimone and Duncan, 1995); it becomes more efficient with age (Harnishfeger and Bjorkland, 1993). In other words, immature cognition is characterized by greater susceptibility to interference from competing actions (Diamond, 1990;Brainerd and Reyna, 1993;Dempster, 1993;Casey et al., 2001Casey et al., , 2002Munakata and Yerys, 2001), as evidenced in children when performing Stroopinterference tasks (Tipper et al., 1989), card sorting (Zelazo et al., 1996;Munakata and Yerys 2001), and go-no-go tasks (Luria, 1961; Casey et al., 1997a,b;Vaidya et al., 1998). In all cases, children have more difficulty making the correct response when there is interference from competing response alternatives.Overriding well learned actions in favor of new ones and the development of neural subsystems underlying this ability is the focus of this paper. In essence, how does the less mature system recruit brain regions when making a new response to a given stimulus relative to making a well learned response to that same stimulus (i.e., stimulus-response incompatibility)? This ability involves both overriding an old association while simultaneously learning a new one. The ability to shift between behavioral sets has...

show abstract

“…The inhibition hypothesis assumes that changes in inhibitory processes contribute to age differences in memory capacity, since such processes affect whether irrelevant information intrudes into or remains in STM (Harnishfeger & Bjorklund, 1993;Hasher, Stoltzfus, Zacks, & Rympa, 1991;Wilson & Kipp, 1998). Further, a variety of studies have indicated that inhibitory processes develop across childhood, and may play a role in memory development (e.g., Brainerd, 1995;Dempster, 1992Dempster, , 1993Diamond, 1991;Harnishfeger & Bjorklund, 1993;Harnishfeger & Pope, 1996;Tipper, Bourque, Anderson, & Brehaut, 1989;Wilson & Kipp, 1998).…”

Section: Effects Of Inhibitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's Serial Recall Errors: Implications for Theories of Short-Term Memory Development

McCormack

Brown

Vousden

et al. 2000

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments examined developmental changes in serial recall of lists of 6 letters, with errors classified as movements, omissions, intrusions, or repetitions. In Experiments 1 and 2, developmental differences between groups of children aged from 7 to 11 years and adults were found in the pattern of serial recall errors. The errors of older participants were more likely to be movements than were those of younger participants, who made more intrusions and omissions. The number of repetition errors did not change with age, and this finding is interpreted in terms of a developmentally invariant postoutput response inhibition process. This interpretation was supported by the findings of Experiment 3, which measured levels of response inhibition in 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds by comparing recall of lists with and without repeated items. Response inhibition remained developmentally invariant, although older children showed greater response facilitation (improved correct recall of adjacent repeated items). Group differences in the patterns of other errors are accounted for in terms of developmental changes in levels of output forgetting and changes in the efficiency of temporal encoding processes.

show abstract

The Ontogeny of Inhibition Mechanisms: A Renewed Approach to Cognitive Development

Cited by 150 publications

References 66 publications

Specificity of inhibitory deficits in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease

Specificity of inhibitory deficits in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease

Dissociating Striatal and Hippocampal Function Developmentally with a Stimulus–Response Compatibility Task

Children's Serial Recall Errors: Implications for Theories of Short-Term Memory Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About