Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Short Research Article

Can Methodological Considerations Challenge the Dissociation of the Perceptual and Motor Inhibitory Processes?

Published Online:December 21, 2017https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000380

Abstract

Abstract. Using an original conflict task paradigm, Nassauer and Halperin (2003) argued that inhibition ability can be classified into two distinct perceptual and motor inhibitory processes. The current study examined the robustness of this paradigm by raising two major methodological points: the amount of information that needs to be processed and the task order (fixed vs. random). Sixty young adults performed the original or modified tasks. Overall, a decrease in the amount of information had the effect of removing the stimulus conflict on some subtests. Therefore, no more inhibition performance could be assessed. Even if the findings can be interpreted as a change in response-related complexity that relates reaction time performance to the informational processing load, the discrepancies in terms of the amount of information originally designed are necessary to induce inhibitory conflicts. Additionally, unlike previous recommendations, the fixed task order initially adopted cannot be considered an essential methodological requirement.

References

  • Bebard, A. C., Trampush, J. W., Newcorn, J. H. & Halperin, J. M. (2010). Perceptual and motor inhibition in adolescents/young adults with childhood-diagnosed ADHD. Neuropsychology, 24, 424–434. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018752 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M. & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computer, 25, 257–271. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dempster, F. N. & Corkill, A. J. (1999). Individual differences in susceptibility to interference and general cognitive ability. Acta Psychologica, 101, 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00013-X First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Germain, S. & Collette, F. (2008). Dissociation of perceptual and motor inhibitory processes in young and elderly participants using the Simon task. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 14, 1014–1021. https://doi.org/10.1017/S135561770808123X First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Grandjean, J. & Collette, F. (2011). Influence of response prepotency strength, general working memory resources, and specific working memory load on the ability to inhibit predominant responses: A comparison of young and elderly participants. Brain and Cognition, 77, 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2011.08.004 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Harnishfeger, K. K. (1995). The development of cognitive inhibition. Theories, definitions, and research evidence. In F. N. DempsterC. J. BrainerdEds., Interference and Inhibition in Cognition (pp. 175–206). London, UK: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hasher, L., Zacks, R. T. & May, C. P. (1999). Inhibitory control, circadian arousal and age. In D. GopherA. KoriatEds., Attention and performances XVII, cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application (pp. 653–675). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hick, W. E. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4, 11–26. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hommel, B., Pratt, J., Colzato, L. & Godijn, R. (2001). Symbolic control of visual attention. Psychological Science, 12, 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00367 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Jennings, J., Mendelson, D., Redfern, M. & Nebes, R. (2011). Detecting age differences in inhibition process with test of perceptual and motor inhibition. Experimental Aging Research, 37, 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2011.554512 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Laming, D. R. J. (1968). Information Theory of choice-reaction times. London, UK: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lezak, M. D. (1995). Neuropsychological assessment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • May, C. P., Kane, M. J. & Hasher, L. (1995). Determinants of negative priming. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 25–34. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mendelson, D., Redfern, M., Nebes, R. & Jennings, J. (2010). Inhibitory processes relate differently to balance/reaction time dual tasks in young and older adults. Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B Aging, Neuropsychology, Cognition, 17, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580902914040 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A. & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Mohammad, M. T., Whitney, S. L., Sparto, P. J., Jennings, J. R. & Furman, J. M. (2010). Perceptual and motor inhibition in individuals with vestibular disorders. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 34, 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/NPT.0b013e3181dde582 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Nassauer, K. W. & Halperin, J. M. (2003). Dissociation of perceptual and motor inhibition processes through the use of novel computerized conflict tasks. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 25–30. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Nigg, J. T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: Views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 220–246. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Nissen, M. J. (1977). Stimulus intensity and information processing. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, 338–352. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Redfern, M., Jennings, R., Mendelson, D. & Nebes, R. (2009). Perceptual inhibition is associated with sensory integration in standing postural control among older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 64, 569–576. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbp060 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Redick, T. S., Calvo, A., Gay, C. E. & Engle, R. W. (2011). Working memory capacity and Go/No-Go task performance: Selective effects of updating, maintenance, and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 308–324. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022216 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Roberts, R. J., Hager, L. D. & Heron, C. (1994). Prefrontal cognitive processes: Working memory and inhibition in the antisaccade task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 374–393. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Sanders, A. F. (1998). Elements of human performance: Reaction processes and attention in human skill. In R. HassinK. N. OchsnerY. TropeEds., Self-control in society, mind, and brain (pp. 507–556). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Schulz, K. P., Tang, C. Y., Fan, J., Marks, D. J., Newcorn, J. H., Cheung, A. M. & Halperin, J. M. (2005). Differential prefrontal cortex activation during inhibitory control in adolescents with and without childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychology, 19, 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.19.3.390 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Sebastian, A., Baldermann, C., Feige, B., Katzev, M., Scheller, E., Hellwig, B., … Klöppel, S. (2013). Differential effects of age on subcomponents of response inhibition. Neurobiology of Aging, 34, 2183–2193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.03.013 First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Van der Molen, M. W. (2000). Developmental changes in inhibitory processing: Evidence from psychophysiological measures. Biological Psychology, 54, 207–239. First citation in articleCrossref Medline, Google Scholar

  • Welford, A. T. (1980). Choice reaction time: Basic concepts. In A. T. WelfordEd., Reaction times (pp. 73–128). New York, NY: Academic Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar