Elsevier

Brain and Cognition

Volume 30, Issue 1, February 1996, Pages 20-43
Brain and Cognition

Regular Article
Inhibitory Mechanisms of Neural and Cognitive Control: Applications to Selective Attention and Sequential Action

https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1996.0003Get rights and content

Abstract

This paper discusses the role of inhibition in neural and cognitive control, in particular its role in selective processes in perception and action. We first review neuroanatomical and physiological evidence that cortical control is mediated by a variety of local-circuit inhibitory neurons, distributed throughout all layers and areas of the cortex. We then consider the use of inhibition in control processes in behavioral neural network models, focusing on two areas: selective attention and sequential action. Relations between the architecture and dynamics of these models and relevant neurological findings are discussed. We conclude that a full understanding of inhibitory control of mental functioning will require the integration of data from both the behavioral and neural levels, and that formal neural network models can play an important role in bridging this epistemological divide.

References (0)

Cited by (171)

  • Non-linear spelling in writing after a pure cerebellar lesion.

    2019, Neuropsychologia
    Citation Excerpt :

    Several studies have shed light on certain components of written language skills that may be differentially impaired by brain damage (Caramazza et al., 1987). The most common deficits in processing written language (i.e., agraphia) result from damage to the graphemic buffer system, which combines both information on the lexicon for familiar words and a phonology-to-orthography mapping system for spelling conversion (Houghton, 1990, 1994; Houghton et al., 1994; Houghton and Tipper, 1996; Glasspool and Houghton, 2005) and is part of a more general “Spelling Model” (Caramazza et al., 1987). Typically, patients with graphemic buffer output (GOB) disorder are characterized by semantic paragraphias (i.e., substitution, omission or displacement of letters, syllables or words in a sentence), derivational errors (Hatfield, 1985), deletion errors in words of all lengths (i.e., “ABCD” becomes “ACD”) (Katz, 1991; Costa et al., 2011), errors in phoneme-graphene conversion (i.e., vocal patterns are not synchronized with the same letters in writing, but with letters that have a similar sound, so “ABCDEF” becomes “APCDEV”), imaginability and grammatical class effects (Ward and Romani, 1998), errors in the final part of the word and word-length effects (i.e., presence of classical errors, such as an insertion, deletion or substitution in the last parts of the words, especially in words of at least 6 letters such as “ABCDEFG”) (Schiller et al., 2001), substitutions (i.e., “ABCD” becomes “ABXD”), deletion errors and fragment responses that preserve the first letter (i.e., “ABCDE” becomes “ABD”) (Cipolotti et al., 2004; Schubert and Nickels, 2015), or selective impairment of consonants (i.e., “ABCCI” becomes “AB__I”) (Miceli et al., 2004).

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text