Behavioral and electrophysiological correlates of Simon and flanker conflict interference in younger and older adults

Spatial incompatibility training can prevent the occurrence of the enhanced Simon effect in elderly

“…Our study was elaborated based on the assumptions that the Simon effect is larger for older participants (Kawai et al, 2012;Kubo-Kawai & Kawai, 2010;Van der Lubbe & Verleger, 2002) and also considering evidences indicating cognitive declines in older adults (Nissim et al, 2017;Scrivano & Kieffaber, 2021;Wang et al, 2011). Actually, the magnitude of the Simon effect for older volunteers found herein (42 ms) showed a similar pattern to those reported by others.…”

“…Researchers have described a larger Simon effect and slower RT in older adult volunteers when compared to young adults (Kawai et al, 2012;Kubo-Kawai & Kawai, 2010;Scrivano & Kieffaber, 2021;Van der Lubbe & Verleger, 2002). Some authors have suggested that an age-related cognitive decline impairs the suppression of automatic response activation to the irrelevant spatial attribute, leading to an enlarged Simon effect (Van der Lubbe & Verleger, 2002;Kubo-Kawai & Kawai, 2010;Kawai et al, 2012).…”

The Effects of Aging and Time of Day on Inhibitory Control: An Event-Related Potential Study

“…Our hypotheses combined existing behavioral and ERP research demonstrating inhibition deficits in aging ( Vallesi et al, 2010 ; Vallesi, 2011 ; Hsieh and Fang, 2012 ; Kawai et al, 2012 ; Scrivano and Kieffaber, 2022 ) and behavioral and fMRI research demonstrating synchrony effects and TOD modulation of age-related differences in inhibitory efficiency ( May and Hasher, 1998 ; Borella et al, 2010 ; Anderson et al, 2014 ). First, we expected to replicate prior aging work showing poorer response inhibition and interference control in OAs relative to YAs, as reflected by behavioral indices (i.e., larger reaction time and accuracy difference scores, calculated from the difference between a basic processing condition and an inhibition condition), and neural indices (i.e., larger modulation of ERP components indexing inhibition).…”

“…Recent ERP research by Kan et al (2021) demonstrated that response inhibition and interference control, assessed through a hybrid Go-NoGo Flanker task, share similar cognitive processes in the early stages (i.e., N2), but exhibit different temporal mechanisms in the later stages (i.e., P3) of inhibitory processing. More specifically, the Go-NoGo P3 reflects the actual process of response inhibition (i.e., active suppression of the motor response, Band and Van Boxtel, 1999 ; Kok et al, 2004 ) and the Flanker P3 reflects interference control and resolution needed to negotiate the conflict response demands of the target stimulus ( Van ’t Ent, 2002 ; Scrivano and Kieffaber, 2022 ). According to the Inhibitory Deficit Theory ( Hasher and Zacks, 1988 ; Hasher and Campbell, 2020 ; Amer et al, 2022 ), older adults (OAs) are less able to suppress or ignore irrelevant thoughts and actions relative to younger adults (YAs).…”

“…Prior work has shown age-related behavioral deficits in response inhibition as indexed by increased reaction times (RTs) and error rates (Bedard et al, 2002;Bielak et al, 2006;Andrés et al, 2008;Potter and Grealy, 2008;Carriere et al, 2010;Hämmerer et al, 2010; but see Vallesi, 2011;Kardos et al, 2020). Additionally, past studies have found age-related deficits in interference control as indexed by larger RT and accuracy differences between congruent and incongruent trials (Zeef and Kok, 1993;Spieler et al, 1996;Zeef et al, 1996;Kok, 1999;West and Alain, 2000;van der Lubbe and Verleger, 2002;Proctor et al, 2005;Kawai et al, 2012;Chow et al, 2021;Scrivano and Kieffaber, 2022; but see Wild-Wall et al, 2008;Hsieh and Fang, 2012).…”