Cited by 699Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismBehavioral Health and Interventions

A unified framework for inhibitory control

Open access
Munakata, Yuko, Herd, Seth A., Chatham, Christopher H., Depue, Brendan E., Banich, Marie T., O’Reilly, Randall C.·2011·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Inhibiting unwanted thoughts, actions and emotions figures centrally in daily life, and the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is widely viewed as a source of this inhibitory control. We argue that the function of the PFC is best understood in terms of representing and actively maintaining abstract information, such as goals, which produces two types of inhibitory effects on other brain regions. Inhibition of some subcortical regions takes a directed global form, with prefrontal regions providing contextual information relevant to when to inhibit all processing in a region. Inhibition within neocortical (and some subcortical) regions takes an indirect competitive form, with prefrontal regions providing excitation of goal-relevant options. These distinctions are crucial for understanding the mechanisms of inhibition and how they can be impaired or improved.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2011.07.011

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An alternative proposal is that the unity component reflects individual differences in the ability to actively maintain goals and use those goals to bias ongoing processing.

    “An alternative proposal is that the unity component reflects individual differences in the ability to actively maintain goals and use those goals to bias ongoing processing [29, 97, 167].”

    From The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function (2022) · cites this paper as [97]

    The section on indirect competitive inhibition says actively maintained prefrontal representations bias processing toward goal-relevant information, and the Concluding remarks link failures of goal maintenance to inhibitory deficits. The paper does not identify the citing document’s “unity component” or establish that individual differences in it reflect this ability. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • These cortical regions provide top-down inhibitory control of subcortical regions, including the amygdala, NAc, and dorsal striatum.

    “These cortical regions provide top-down inhibitory control of subcortical regions, including the amygdala, NAc, and dorsal STR (Munakata et al., 2011).”

    From Sensitive periods of substance abuse: Early risk for the transition to dependence (2017) · cites this paper as Munakata et al., 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Munakata, Y., Herd, S. A., Chatham, C. H., Depue, B. E., Banich, M. T., & O’Reilly, R. C.
Affiliations
University of Colorado Boulder (US)
Corresponding author
Munakata, Yuko
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-10
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
453-459
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2149308981
Cited by
699
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 23
FWCI
3.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH079485)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD37163, R01HD037163)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
inhibitory control, prefrontal cortex, goal-directed behavior, goal maintenance, competitive inhibition, cognitive control
MeSH terms
Goals, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Prefrontal Cortex

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review