What is Cognitive Inhibition?

Cognitive Inhibition

Cognitive inhibition refers to the stopping, slowing down, or overriding of a mental process, be it intentional or automatic, possibly as a side-effect of some other process. In particular, it can be observed in a variety of contexts within cognitive science, developmental psychology, and behavioral neuroscience.

Fundamentally, it acts as a sort of mental filtering system, allowing individuals to concentrate on the task at hand without distractions. Important concepts within cognitive inhibition include:

  • Selective Attention: The capacity to focus on relevant details while ignoring the irrelevant ones.
  • Thought Suppression: The deliberate attempt to avoid certain thoughts that might be intrusive or distracting.
  • Resistance to Interference: The ability to remain focused even when faced with potentially disrupting information or stimuli.

Inhibitory Control and Executive Function

Inhibitory control is tied to an individual’s capacity to suppress impulses and resist distractions. This facet of executive function manifests as self-control, enabling a person to maintain focus on goals in the presence of competing interests or desires. For instance, during tasks that require cognitive flexibility, the prefrontal cortex exerts control to modulate behavior appropriately.

Inhibitory control also plays a pivotal role in behavioral regulation by facilitating decision-making processes that are aligned with societal norms and personal long-term benefits. It acts as an internal mechanism tasked with the self-control necessary for adapting one’s responses in social situations. Those with well-developed inhibitory control are better at adjusting their behaviors to meet changing environmental demands.

Evidence indicates females have a higher basal capacity to exert inhibitory control over undesirable or habitual actions, and they respond differently to modulatory ambient contextual elements than males do. For example, listening to music improves the rate of response inhibition in females while decreasing it in males.

Emotion Regulation

In emotion regulation, inhibitory control plays a pivotal role in moderating emotional responses. For example, an individual may feel anger in a challenging work situation but uses inhibitory control to prevent an outburst and instead responds in a calm, collected manner. This form of self-control allows for the suppression of inappropriate emotional reactions, contributing to emotional stability and social appropriateness.

Cognitive inhibition is thought to have a substantial influence on both sexual and aggressive impulses in human society. When an individual perceives signals or stimuli, the mind processes the information while the body responds.

However, in the case of sexual arousal or perceived violent behavior, the individual must take caution in cognitive processing of incoming information. This is when cognitive inhibition comes into play, stopping the individual from cognitively processing the stimuli and responding inappropriately, potentially safeguarding critical social ties.

Inhibition in Learning and Memory

Memory inhibition is pivotal in managing the vast amount of information processed by individuals daily. It helps in suppressing irrelevant or unwanted memories, allowing for the maintenance of more critical and pertinent information.

Studies have shown that reduced accessibility of competing memories can be beneficial to cognitive processes. However, this advantage comes with the challenge that a person may need to retrieve an inhibited memory later, which can become difficult due to the suppression.

Cognitive inhibition significantly impacts various learning processes, including conditioning and directed forgetting. In conditioning, the ability to suppress previous associations is essential to adopt new ones, highlighting the necessity of inhibition for adaptation and change.

Directed forgetting, on the other hand, involves the intention to prevent retrieval of specific information. This is a deliberate use of inhibition, illustrating that cognitive processes are not only passive but can be actively manipulated. Inhibition gates learning and stabilizes the protection of newly formed memories from interference, exemplifying its role in continual learning.

Biological Basis

Cognitive inhibition involves a complex interplay of physiologic processes. The prefrontal cortex, caudate nucleus, and subthalamic nucleus are all known to regulate inhibitory control cognition.

Another aspect is the presence of inhibitory neurotransmitters, which are substances released by brain cells to both communicate and inhibit communication with one another, although evidence for direct causation is mixed.

For example, Eduardo Aponte and colleagues investigated the role of the GABA signaling response inhibition and conflict adaptation. The researchers used a computational model called SERIA to investigate the role of GABAergic signaling in response inhibition and conflict adaptation. In one of the experiments, the researchers administered lorazepam, a positive modulator of the GABA-A receptor, to enhance GABAergic transmission.

They compared lorazepam’s effects on reaction inhibition and conflict adaptability to a placebo control. The findings suggest that increased GABA-A signaling promotes conflict adaptability while impairing reaction inhibition.

The brain has high levels of serotonin and dopamine, both of which can act as inhibitors. All three of these neurotransmitters are capable of “blocking” neurotransmissions, which can contribute to cognitive inhibition.

Inhibitory Dysfunction

In individuals with depression, evidence suggests that cognitive inhibition is often impaired, manifesting as difficulty in suppressing negative thoughts and emotions. This impairment can intensify feelings of sadness and hopelessness.

Anxiety, too, is associated with a disruption in inhibitory processes. Those dealing with anxiety may struggle with emotional control, resulting in heightened responses to stressors.

Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder may experience the effects of decreased cognitive inhibition. In a 2002 study, Shelley Bannon and colleagues found that OCD patients made significantly more commission errors than matched panic disorder control subjects in a computerized task that required the inhibition of responses on a proportion of trials— OCD patients tended to make inappropriate motor responses to non-target stimuli.

Cognitive inhibition in OCD patients appears to impair response time to significant stimuli while lowering the ability to tune out irrelevant stimuli. This may explain why OCD responses to specific stimuli can be difficult to control.

There are age-related consequences on a person’s capacity to execute cognitive inhibition, most notably language impairment. When speaking, many older persons have difficulty “finding” the words they wish to say, which indicates that their cognitive inhibition skills are not functioning effectively.

Inefficient Inhibition

Many contemporary cognitive theorists propose models with a central pool of mental resources, in which working memory and the various brain areas responsible for it are theoretically limited to a finite set of “mental resources” or mental capacity with which to perform operations.

Cognitive inhibition determines what is relevant to working memory and excludes what is irrelevant, so “freeing up space” and mental capacity for more pressing tasks.
According to the theory of inefficient inhibition, cognitive inhibition does not fully accomplish its role, and a lack of mental resources causes poor performance or inefficiency in tasks that need higher mental ability.

While ineffective inhibition can occur naturally in people with mild cognitive impairment, it is especially noticeable in methamphetamine-dependent people. Clinically, these patients can be very distractible and have difficulties focusing, indicating that cognitive inhibition is compromised and ineffective inhibition is the result.

Assessment of Inhibition Skills

In cognitive psychology, inhibition skills are crucial to understanding self-control and attentional processes. They are commonly evaluated through specific neuropsychological tasks that measure the ability to suppress automatic or dominant responses.

The Go/No-Go tasks assess an individual’s ability to perform actions in response to certain stimuli (Go signals) and inhibit responses when a different stimulus is presented (No-Go signals). Performance is measured by the speed and accuracy of the responses.

In a similar vein, Stop-Signal tasks are designed to evaluate an individual’s response inhibition by introducing a “stop” signal that requires the subject to cease an initiated response. The critical measure here is the Stop-Signal Reaction Time (SSRT), which reflects the speed of the inhibition process.

The Stroop Interference test is useful in understanding cognitive control. It involves naming the ink color of words that can either represent a color or a conflicting color name, measuring how long it takes to suppress the automatic reading response.

Factors Affecting Cognitive Inhibition

Cognitive inhibition can be influenced by various factors, ranging from external substances to internal developmental stages. The efficacy of an individual’s cognitive inhibition mechanisms can be either enhanced or impaired depending on these influences.

Study findings suggest that alcohol consumption can impair cognitive inhibition, which can manifest as difficulty in suppressing inappropriate responses or behaviors. For instance, individuals under the influence of alcohol may struggle with tasks requiring the inhibition of a previously relevant response.

The impact of different drugs on cognitive inhibition varies. For example, certain stimulant medications used to treat ADHD are reported to improve cognitive flexibility and inhibition, whereas other drugs may degrade these cognitive functions.

Developmental Factors

Cognitive inhibition is known to improve throughout childhood and adolescence, indicative of a developmental trend.  For example, an experiment done by Ori Friedman and Alan Leslie explained children’s performance in the false belief task as relying on a critical inhibitory process.

Children aged 4 to 8 were presented a narrative in which a character was confused about which of three boxes contained an object. The figure wished to visit one of the boxes, but only if it did not contain the object in question.

In this case, the character would be expected to avoid the box that she misidentified the object to be in, but she may go to any of the other boxes. Although the character was equally likely to travel to either box, children were biased toward predicting that the character would go to the box containing the object.

The results indicated that cognitive inhibition ability formation begins around the age of three or four. The theory is that youngsters as young as three or four years old can block information from their cognitive experiences in order to appraise a situation from another’s perspective. This is critical developmentally because it may interact with the formation of empathy: cognitive inhibition cannot be so powerful that it entirely blocks one’s experiences when evaluating another point of view, but it must be strong enough to allow an accurate depiction of that point of view.

Memory formation and inhibition are two further aspects of cognitive inhibition explored in developmental psychology. It has been shown that purposeful suppression of memory commitment does not fully mature until adulthood, and it is extremely difficult for young children to achieve.

Other cognitive skills that emerge progressively throughout development include exercising self-control over retained representational structures of information and rapidly adapting cognitive processing to changing behavioral settings. Both of these functions have been shown to be present throughout development, but not fully developed until young adulthood.

  1. Bannon, S., Gonsalvez, C. J., Croft, R. J., & Boyce, P. M. (2002). Response inhibition deficits in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatry research, 110(2), 165–174. doi: 10.1016/s0165-1781(02)00104-x
  2. Barron, H. C. (2021). Neural inhibition for continual learning and memory. Current opinion in neurobiology, 67, 85-94
  3. Davidson, Matthew; Dima Amso; Loren Cruess Anderson; Adele Diamond (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia. 44 (11): 2037–2078. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006
  4. Dempster, F; A. Corkill (1999). Neo-interference research and the development of intelligence. In M. Anderson (ed.). The Development of Intelligence. Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis
  5. Eduardo, A., Aponte., Kaja, Fassbender., Jakob, Heinzle., Ulrich, Ettinger. (2022). GABAergic modulation of conflict adaptation and response inhibition. bioRxiv, doi: 10.1101/2022.03.03.482762
  6. Friedman, 0., & Leslie, A. M. (2004). Mechanisms of belief – desire reasoning: Inhibition and bias. Psychological Science, 15, 547-552.
  7. Gohier, B., Ferracci, L., Surguladze, S. A., Lawrence, E., El Hage, W., Kefi, M. Z., Allain, P., Garre, J. B., & Le Gall, D. (2009). Cognitive inhibition and working memory in unipolar depression. Journal of affective disorders, 116(1-2), 100–105. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2008.10.028
  8. Harnishfeger, K.K. (1995) The development of cognitive inhibition: Theories, definitions and research evidence. In: Dempster, F.N. and Brainerd, C.J. Eds., New perspectives on interference and inhibition in cognition. Academic Press, San Diego ISBN 9780080534916
  9. Houx, P. J., Jolles, J., & Vreeling, F. W. (1993). Stroop interference: aging effects assessed with the Stroop Color-Word Test. Experimental aging research, 19(3), 209-224.
  10. Hulbert, J. C., & Anderson, M. C. (2008). The role of inhibition in learning. Advances in Psychology, 139, 7-20.
  11. Kang, Weixi; Hernández, Sònia Pineda; Rahman, Md. Shahinoor; Voigt, Katharina; Malvaso, Antonio (2022). Inhibitory Control Development: A Network Neuroscience Perspective. Frontiers in Psychology. 13: 651547. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.651547
  12. MacLeod, C. M. (2007). The concept of inhibition in cognition. In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), Inhibition in cognition. American Psychological Association
  13. Mansouri FA, Fehring DJ, Gaillard A, Jaberzadeh S, Parkington H (2016). Sex dependency of inhibitory control functions. Biol Sex Differ. 7: 11. doi:10.1186/s13293-016-0065-y
  14. Salo, Ruth; Thomas E. Nordahl; Kate Possin; Martin Leamon; David R. Gibson; Gantt P. Galloway; Neil M. Flynn; Avishai Henik; Adolf Pfefferbaum; Edith V. Sullivan (2002). Preliminary evidence of reduced cognitive inhibition in methamphetamine-dependent individuals. Psychiatry Research. 111 (1): 65–74. doi: 10.1016/s0165-1781(02)00111-7
  15. Zacks, R.T.; L. Hasher (1994). Directed ignoring: Inhibitory regulation of working memory. Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory, and Language: 241–264.