Table 1.
Block order and number of trials per block for each task.
Fig 1.
Example of one trial sequence for the digit-updating task.
The duration of the blank at the beginning of each updating step (1800 ms or 500 ms) was determined by the length of the subsequent CTI: If the CTI was short (200 ms), the blank was long (1800 ms), if the CTI was long (1500 ms), the blank was short (500 ms). Thus, the retention interval between updating steps was constant at 2000 ms.
Fig 2.
Example of one trial sequence for each inhibition task used in the present study.
Indivi. = individually.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics.
Table 3.
Pearson correlation coefficients.
Illustration of the different models computed in the present study.
Fig 3. (A) Single-factor model with removal as a latent variable (Model 1). (B) Single-factor model in which all tasks assumed to assess inhibition loaded on a latent variable (Model 2). (C) Single-factor model in which the antisaccade, Simon and negative-compatibility tasks loaded on a latent variable (Model 4). (D) Same model as Model 2, except that the correlation was disattenuated for imperfect reliability (Model 5). (E) Same model as Model 4, except that the correlation was disattenuated for imperfect reliability (Model 7). The numbers next to the straight, single-headed arrows are the standardized factor loadings (interpretable as standardized regression coefficients). The numbers adjacent to the curved, double-headed arrows next to each task are the error variances, attributable to idiosyncratic task requirements and measurement error. For all parameters, boldface type indicates p < .05.
Table 4.
Goodness-of-fit statistics.