754 niicapracticc.Theseowevrae on (in ator able for evaluatine cognition comprehensively To address long SOA conditions (e.g>500 ms),the response pattern these limitations,researchers have developed a more sen- reverses(i.e.,responses to targets occurring at the cued loca menon is called IOR.Although 2000)ACE-R extends the content of MMSE me five major cognitive functions:attention and orientation ing,Hopfinger Mangun,2001),the prevailing view holds function,epis odic and semantic memory, verbal flue hat IOR,a ry after functio pre Dawson.Mirchell.Arnold-Hodges.2006).the ACE-R is tion may begin when atrention mov away from the cuce recommended as a suitable and efficient tool for evaluar location,or when the cue is presented(but the early,atten ons in older adults (Larner Mitchell. obscures the inhibition;Klein ding the with norma cognitive functions o on the However there are two maio sho for thes The IOR effect a neuropsychological tests in practical application.First,per facilitation,therefore any mechanism that decreases inhibi formance on neuropsychological tests may be influenced by the eve Prev tud 014 eof IOR cipants with limir 50 and 3 000 ms Castel.Chas ity or low education may have difficulty completing the Pratt (2003)compared the time course of IOR in younge assessment. and older adults.When rese rs plotted cueing effects as also and/o they found mpare in. SOA rhat th to develop more objective and efficient asses ssment tools onset time (IOR-OT)delayed A novel approach to this issue is to identify key cognitive This delay in IOR-OT has been repli ed in a numbe processes mpacted by cog ive aging and then to ex (e.g,Bao,Zhe Fu,2 abili in th Amon the many theories addressing th auses of co 2016:Wasch The inhibitory deficit theory may account for the delay of IOR-OT in older adults.Inhibi ory processes are consic to act the vice of goals to (a)preve rrelevan dthe mos g ac ally would not effectively inhibit irelevant information tion,and (c)restrain prepotent re nses (Hasher.Lustig nctions (e.g..slowdo might no Hash mer ding compre rom a and he by a sulting in a 014)R L. a weaker inhibitory ability woud It remain unclear howeyer whether the delay of nitive functions IOR-OT in the aging population is associated with their genera function (IOR)is w of IOp an teddcross ral cueing task develo and Cohen (1984).In d that IOR-OT and functionin sence of are related.However,in many conditions,if we merel Before the 0 mpar the ma (SOA) both foo and intelli short (e.g.,200 ms),the reaction time (RT)at the cued and adults,which leads to an apparent"correlation"that tools in clinical practice. These tests, however, are insensi￾tive in differentiating levels of cognitive functioning (Luis, Keegan, & Mullan, 2009; Mitchell, 2009), and are not suit￾able for evaluating cognition comprehensively. To address these limitations, researchers have developed a more sen￾sitive and comprehensive cognitive test battery, known as the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE￾R) (Mathuranath, Nestor, Berrios, Rakowicz, & Hodges, 2000). ACE-R extends the content of MMSE, measuring five major cognitive functions: attention and orientation function, episodic and semantic memory, verbal fluency, language function, and visuo-spatial ability. With good val￾idity and cross-culture usability (Fang et al., 2014; Mioshi, Dawson, Mitchell, Arnold, & Hodges, 2006), the ACE-R is recommended as a suitable and efficient tool for evaluat￾ing cognitive functions in older adults (Larner & Mitchell, 2014), including those with normal cognitive functions or unnoticeable cognitive declines. However, there are two major shortcomings for these neuropsychological tests in practical application. First, per￾formance on neuropsychological tests may be influenced by the language capacity or education level of the par￾ticipants (Gamaldo et al., 2018; Velayudhan et al., 2014). Specifically, participants with limitations in language abil￾ity or low education may have difficulty completing the assessment. Second, using these neuropsychological tests also requires professional assessment skills and/or lan￾guage skills of interviewers, which could consume social resources in personnel training. Therefore, it is necessary to develop more objective and efficient assessment tools. A novel approach to this issue is to identify key cognitive processes impacted by cognitive aging and then to examine whether these processes could account for individual differ￾ences in general cognitive ability in the aging population. Among the many theories addressing the causes of cog￾nitive aging (see Anderson & Craik, 2017 for a review), the inhibitory deficit theory (Hasher, Stoltzfus, Zack, & Rypma, 1991; Hasher & Zack, 1988) is arguably the most influential. This theory proposes that older adults gener￾ally would not effectively inhibit irrelevant information or stop prepotent responses, leading to a decline of cogni￾tive and behavioral functions (e.g., slowdown of response, reduced memory, and poor reading comprehension, Weeks & Hasher, 2014). Based on this theory, an older adult with a weaker inhibitory ability would have poorer general cog￾nitive functions. In the study of inhibitory processes, inhibition of return (IOR) is widely regarded as a reliable indicator of inhibitory attentional control. IOR is measured by the Posner periph￾eral cueing task developed by Posner and Cohen (1984). In this task, participants are asked to detect the presence of the target and respond as quickly as possible. Before the display of the target, an uninformative peripheral cue that does not predict the location of the target is presented. When the cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) is short (e.g., < 200 ms), the reaction time (RT) at the cued location (valid trial) is faster than that at the uncued loca￾tion (invalid trial). This is called a facilitatory effect, indi￾cating a reflexive shift of attention to the cued location. In long SOA conditions (e.g., > 500 ms), the response pattern reverses (i.e., responses to targets occurring at the cued loca￾tion are slowed). This phenomenon is called IOR. Although the specific processes of information processing affected by IOR remain controversial (e.g., response processes, Pastötter, Hanslmayr, & Bäuml, 2008; or sensory process￾ing, Hopfinger & Mangun, 2001), the prevailing view holds that IOR, as an inhibitory aftereffect, reflects inhibition of the previously attended location (Dukewich & Klein, 2015; Gazzaniga, Ivry, & Mangun, 2014; Klein, 2000). The inhibi￾tion may begin when attention moves away from the cued location, or when the cue is presented (but the early, atten￾tionally-mediated facilitation obscures the inhibition; Klein, 2000). The IOR effect may depend on the relative strength of two opponent processes (i.e., facilitation vs inhibition). The IOR effect appears when the inhibition dominates the facilitation, therefore any mechanism that decreases inhibi￾tory control will delay the appearance of IOR. Previous studies found an age-related difference of IOR effects. For instance, with 11 cue-target SOAs that ranged between 50 and 3,000  ms, Castel, Chasteen, Scialfa, and Pratt (2003) compared the time course of IOR in younger and older adults. When researchers plotted cueing effects as a function of cue-target SOAs they found that, compared with younger adults, IOR effects appeared in longer cue￾target SOA conditions in older adults, meaning that the onset time of IOR (IOR-OT) in older adults was delayed. This delay in IOR-OT has been replicated in a number of subsequent studies (e.g., Bao, Zhou, & Fu, 2004; Langley, Friesen, Saville, & Ciernia, 2011; Muiños, Palmero, & Ballesteros, 2016; Wascher, Falkenstein, & Wildwall, 2011). The inhibitory deficit theory may account for the delay of IOR-OT in older adults. Inhibitory processes are consid￾ered to act in the service of goals to (a) prevent irrelevant information from gaining access to the focus of attention, (b) delete irrelevant information from the focus of atten￾tion, and (c) restrain prepotent responses (Hasher, Lustig, & Zack, 2007). Thus, due to their deficits in inhibitory abil￾ity, older adults might not efficiently prohibit and/or recover from attentional capture by a distracting cue, resulting in a longer dwell time and hence a later onset of IOR. It remains unclear, however, whether the delay of IOR-OT in the aging population is associated with their decline in general cognitive functions. Previous cross￾sectional studies have identified an age-related decline in both onset of IOR and general cognitive functioning. These results suggested that IOR-OT and cognitive functioning are related. However, in many conditions, if we merely compare the data of different age groups and neglect the confounding effect of age, we may find an unreliable “cor￾relation” between factors. For example, there are differ￾ences in both foot size and intelligence between children and adults, which leads to an apparent “correlation” that 754 Journals of Gerontology: PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2020, Vol. 75, No. 4 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/75/4/753/5033575 by Southern Medical University user on 04 May 2022