Abstract

Inhibitory control represents a central component of executive functions and focuses on the ability to actively inhibit or delay a dominant response to achieve a goal. Although various tasks exist to measure inhibitory control, correlations between these tasks are rather small, partly because of the task impurity problem. To alleviate this problem, a latent variable approach has been previously applied and two closely related yet separable functions have been identified: prepotent response inhibition and resistance to distractor interference. The goal of our study was a) to replicate the proposed structure of inhibitory control and b) to extend previous literature by additionally accounting for speed-accuracy trade-offs, thereby potentially increasing explained variance in the investigated latent factors. To this end, 190 participants completed six inhibitory control tasks (antisaccade task, Stroop task, stop-signal task, flanker task, shape-matching task, word-naming task). Analyses were conducted using standard scores as well as inverse efficiency scores (combining response times and error rates). In line with previous studies, we generally found low zero-order correlations between the six tasks. By applying confirmatory factor analysis using standard reaction time difference scores, we were not able to replicate a satisfactory model with good fit to the data. By using inverse efficiency scores, a two-related-factor and a one-factor model emerged that resembled previous literature, but only four out of six tasks demonstrated significant factor loadings. Our results highlight the difficulty in finding robust inter-correlations between commonly used inhibitory control tasks, even when applying a latent variable analysis and accounting for speed-accuracy trade-offs.

Highlights

  • Gärtner and StrobelJournal of CognitionInhibitory control represents a central component of executive functions

  • Research has shown that inhibitory control represents a core ability that is associated with various types of executive functions, e.g., working memory updating and shifting (Miyake & Friedman, 2012)

  • This well-known task impurity problem indicates that, since any target inhibitory control process must be embedded in a specific context, systematic variance is attributable to non-inhibitory control abilities (Miyake et al, 2000)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Gärtner and StrobelJournal of CognitionInhibitory control represents a central component of executive functions. Given that no tasks are pure measures of inhibitory control, it remains unclear whether the observed effects rely rather on idiosyncratic task requirements instead of inhibitory control This well-known task impurity problem (that is related to all executive functions) indicates that, since any target inhibitory control process must be embedded in a specific context, systematic variance is attributable to non-inhibitory control abilities (Miyake et al, 2000). This and random measurement error make it difficult to purely measure inhibitory control variance. Low zero-order and often insignificant correlations between commonly used inhibitory control tasks have been reported and likely result from these problems (e.g. Enge et al, 2014; Singh et al, 2018)

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.