Abstract
This chapter addresses the inhibitory processing training. The topic is analyzed placing the emphasis on the process-based approach (e.g., predominant in executive functions training). Special emphasis is also placed on inhibitory training during childhood. Reference is made to both theoretical aspects (theoretical model and inhibitory processes addressed) and practical aspects (transfer effects of training). The authors review studies of specific inhibitory training, which meet certain methodological requirements (e.g., random designs with at least two groups and pre- and post-test measurements). The approach of these studies allowed the authors to (1) extract some ideas about the current work in this field (as the taking of a non-unitary perspective of inhibition and the use of computerized experimental tasks); (2) highlight the need for further study, as data on training transfer are not conclusive; and (3) discuss possible fundamental future lines of work.
TopCognitive Training And Executive Functions
Different authors suggest that cognitive training is a set of activities or programs designed to improve the efficiency of specific cognitive functions, throughout practice and/or explicit instructions (Rueda et al., 2016). Likewise, it is argued that the possibility of cognitive change is based on neuronal plasticity, a property of the nervous system presents throughout life, although greater in early stages where the probabilities of generating changes by intervention would increase (Strobach & Karbach, 2016). However, the possibility of change would be linked to multiple factors in interaction, such as genetic factors, hormonal activity, sleep, nutrition, cultural and socio-economic factors, etc. (Delaland et al., 2019; Doebel, 2020; Posner et al., 2013; Rey et al., 2020; Rueda et al., 2005; Schirmbeck et al., 2020).
Many approaches of cognitive training have been classified as process-based and strategy-based training paradigms (Jolles & Crone, 2012). In the first, the participants perform in activities that demand the execution of the target functions to optimize, trying to increase their capacity. These tasks are usually constructed based on experimental paradigms used for the evaluation of these functions, but in general, they are adaptive, that is to say, their level of difficulty is increased according to the participant’s performance. Strategy-based interventions propose explicit directions and instructions (strategies) that are intended to increase performance in specific tasks. Both types of interventions are usually implemented through a certain number of sessions, over a certain period of time. That is, they are not carried out in a single moment, they involve a process that develops over time (Jolles & Crone, 2012; Karbach & Unger, 2014; Rueda et al., 2016; Shin et al., 2020; Smid et al., 2020; Traut et al., 2021).
Process-based interventions predominate in the Executive Functions (EF) training field (Rueda et al., 2016; Smid et al., 2020). They have been increasingly defined as a set of cognitive processes involved in goal-directed behavior, through deliberate control of behaviors, emotions, and thoughts (Diamond, 2013; Friedman & Miyake, 2017). At the neuroanatomical level, EF are associated with the prefrontal cortex and its reciprocal connections with other areas of the cerebral cortex and subcortical structures -such as the basal nuclei, amygdaloid nucleus, diencephalon, and cerebellum- (Carlén, 2017; Fuster, 2008; Silvers et al., 2016). In this context, often Inhibition, Working Memory (WM), and Cognitive Flexibility (CF) are identified as the main EF since they would serve as support for other executive processes of a higher level of integration -such as planning (Diamond, 2013; Nin et al., 2019). Likewise, some authors argue that inhibition underlies the rest of the EF (Gärtner & Strobel, 2021; Hasher et al., 2007). Although nowadays the debate on the nature and structure of the EF continues (e.g., some authors refer to “executive function” and suggest that it should not be defined as components; Doebel, 2020), it has been the theoretical framework of many processes-based interventions, since there is a close relationship between both conceptions (EF and processes-based training).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Inhibition/Control Inhibitory: Responsible for stopping predominant tendencies linked to emotion, thought, behavior, and environmental stimuli that may interfere with the achievement of objectives ( Mann et al., 2013 ).
Working Memory (WM): Involves holding information in mind and mentally working with it (information no longer perceptually present). The two types of WM are distinguished by content, verbal WM and nonverbal (visual-spatial) WM ( Diamond, 2013 ).
Check-Term Transfer: The training effects are recorded after a variable period, in general, from one month ( Canet Juric et al., 2020 ).
Cognitive Flexibility (CF): Involves changing perspectives or approaches to a problem, flexibly adjusting to new demands, rules, or priorities ( Diamond, 2013 ).
Strategy-Based Training: Explicit Instructions are given to improve performance in specific tasks ( Traut et al., 2021 ).
Near Transfer: Training effects on tasks that require the target process of the intervention but that are different from the tasks trained ( Rapport et al., 2013 ).
Executive Functions (EF): Set of cognitive processes involved in goal-directed behavior, through deliberate control of behaviors, emotions, and thoughts ( Diamond, 2013 ).
Perceptual Inhibition (PI): Ability to suppress or eliminate interference generated by environmental stimuli on ongoing tasks ( Diamond, 2013 ).
Cognitive Inhibition (CI): Process that allows deleting irrelevant information from the Working Memory that is related with the interference with the ongoing activity ( Hasher et al., 2007 ).
Short-Term Transfer: The training effects are observed at the end of the intervention ( Canet Juric et al., 2020 ).
Experimental/Random Design: Research designs in which participants are randomly assigned to at least two conditions, one experimental condition or group (that receives the intervention under study; usually named training group [TG]) and another control condition or group (that does not receive the intervention under study; control group [CG]). Before and after, the participants go through the same conditions (e.g., pre and post-test), they only differ in the experimental or control condition. In this way, if changes are observed, they can be attributed to the intervention. Therefore, these designs are recommended to test treatments or interventions ( Diamond, 2012 ; Green et al., 2019 ).
Far Transfer: Generalization of the results to other more complex skills ( Rapport et al., 2013 ).
Response Inhibition (RI): Ability to suppress predominant and inappropriate responses for the context or individual objectives ( Friedman & Miyake, 2004 ).