Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTAttentional control is key to the development of executive functions. Previous research indicates that individual differences in attentional control behaviour may be stable from 6 months. Here, we analyse electroencephalogram data collected from 59 6‐month‐olds to gain insights into the neural processes underlying attentional control in infancy. First, we examine the neural activity preceding distinct looking behaviours in an attentional control task at 6 months. Second, we test whether those neural markers show predictive associations to behavioural measures of attentional control (Freeze‐Frame task) and executive function (A‐not‐B task) in the same infants at 9 months. Whilst our data do not show evidence that 6–9 Hz power is implicated in attentional control at 6 months, or that the P1 ERP component plays a role in our attentional control task, we do find evidence that corroborates and extends research linking 3–6 Hz power to attentional control. At the group level, frontal 3–6 Hz power recorded whilst looking to a central target before the onset of a peripheral distractor was greater during trials where infants subsequently looked to the distractor, compared with trials where they did not look. Higher 3–6 Hz power in trials where the infant did not look to a peripheral distractor was predictive of less distractibility at 9 months, and higher 3 Hz power in trials where infants did look to the distractor strengthened the predictive association from 6‐month EEG to 9‐month behaviour. We suggest 3–6 Hz activity may be sensitive to multiple processes, such as anticipatory attention, and the ability to maintain attention on a target.

AbstractInhibitory control (IC) is a core executive function integral to self‐regulation and cognitive control, yet is itself multi‐componential. Directed global inhibition entails stopping an action on demand. Competitive inhibition is engaged when an alternative response must also be produced. Related, but not an executive function, is temperamentally‐driven wariness of novelty, known as behavioural inhibition. Understanding early development of these components has been hampered by a shortage of suitable measures. We combine established and novel measures to capture directed global inhibition (Toy Prohibition, Touchscreen Prohibition), competitive inhibition (A‐not‐B, Early Childhood Inhibitory Touchscreen Task; ECITT) and behavioural inhibition (Touchscreen Approach) in 113 10‐ and 16‐month‐olds (73 seen longitudinally). ECITT performance shows good 1‐week test‐retest reliability at 10‐months (r = 0.30–0.60) but little stability to 16‐months. Directed global inhibition performance shows developmental progression but little stability of individual differences from 10 to 16 months. Performance on measures targeting similar IC components shows greater coherence at 16‐months (r = 0.23–0.59) compared with 10‐months (r = 0.09–0.35). Probing of ECITT condition effects indicates toddlers are more able, compared with infants, to override immediate prepotencies; indicative of increasingly flexible control over behaviour. However, exerting IC over cumulative prepotencies appears just as challenging for toddlers as infants. Exploratory analyses show little evidence for cross‐sectional or longitudinal associations between behavioural, directed global and competitive inhibition. In combination, these findings indicate that IC is not yet a stable, unidimensional construct during the transition between infancy and toddlerhood, and highlight the need for careful selection of multiple measures for those interested in capturing early variation in IC.

The results leading to this publication have received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 777394 for the project AIMS-2-TRIALS. This Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA and AUTISM SPEAKS, Autistica, SFARI. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results. Any views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the funders.