The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: a latent-variable analysis.

By Naomi P. Friedman, Akira Miyake. Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2004

2,300 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a599d135dd8fe1518faaf3e720f532eae60a38d1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

The development of executive function in childhood (2008, background): “It has been suggested that inhibition can be split down into more specific processes such as motor or response inhibition and interference suppression (Friedman & Miyake, 2004; Kipp, 2005; Nigg, 2000).”
Verbal Memory Interference in Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analytic Review (2022, methodology): “…control tasks such as the Stroop, Flanker, Go/No-Go, Continuous Performance Tests (CPT) and StopSignal, as they reflect measures of prepotent-distractor inhibition rather than memory interference (Friedman & Miyake, 2004), or if the cognitive task did not include a measure of memory interference.”
Inhibitory Control and Emotion Regulation in Preschool Children. (2007, background): “Although EF is often depicted as a unitary construct (e.g., a central executive; Baddeley, 1986; Shallice, 1988), there is some support for at least partially dissociable EF processes involving working memory and different types of inhibition (Friedman & Miyake, 2004; Miyake et al., 2000).”
There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. (2013, positive): “The task-impurity problem makes it very difficult to isolate the different interference-related processes and Friedman and Miyake (2004) have shown that the latent variables for interference control (e.g., the flanker effect in their study) and response inhibition (e.g., antisaccade and Stroop…”
Specifying Links Between Executive Functioning and Theory of Mind during Middle Childhood: Cognitive Flexibility Predicts Social Understanding (2015, background): “…controversy regarding the core regulatory features of executive functioning, there is widespread agreement that executive functioning includes three distinct, yet overlapping, components—working memory, inhibition, and flexibility—during adulthood (Friedman & Miyake, 2004; Miyake et al., 2000).”
Executive Functions (2012, positive): “Factor analyses have found that inhibition of attention (resisting distractor interference) and inhibition of action (inhibiting a prepotent response) are strongly correlated and fall along a single factor (Friedman & Miyake 2004).”
Decision making, impulse control and loss of willpower to resist drugs: a neurocognitive perspective (2005, background): “Besides decision making, there are other mechanisms of inhibitory control, one of which is the ability to deliberately suppress dominant, automatic or pre-potent response”
An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance (2013, positive): “Neuroanatomical specialization is broadly consistent with the behavioral evidence for separable components of executive control (Friedman & Miyake 2004; Friedman et al. 2006; Miyake et al. 2000).”
Cognitive Control of Drug Craving Inhibits Brain Reward Regions in Cocaine Abusers (2009, result): “Our findings (and that of others) identify the frontal cortex as a target region for strengthening inhibitory control (Friedman and Miyake, 2004).”