Prepotent response inhibition and interference control in autism spectrum disorders: two meta-analyses.
People with autism show steady, modest self-control gaps that shift with age and hide behind uneven trial-by-trial performance.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team pooled 41 earlier experiments on two kinds of self-control.
They looked at prepotent response inhibition (stopping your first impulse) and interference control (ignoring distractions).
All studies compared people with autism to typically developing peers.
What they found
Autism groups showed a medium-sized slump in stopping impulses.
They also showed a smaller, but real, dip in blocking distractions.
Older age made the impulse problem look worse, not better.
How this fits with other research
Valeri et al. (2020) saw the same inhibition dip in Italian preschoolers, proving the lag starts early.
Velasquez et al. (2017) found adults with autism used different brain areas yet scored the same on the task, showing behavior can mask neural strain.
Patton et al. (2020) added that kids with autism swing more from trial to trial, so one good response doesn’t rule out underlying noise.
Together the picture is: inhibition is weaker, more variable, and handled by alternate circuits, even when accuracy looks okay.
Why it matters
You can’t assume a calm surface means strong control. Watch for moment-to-moment wobble and give extra wait time. Build in visual cues that remind the learner to pause before acting. These small supports may cut errors that come from quick, unfiltered responses.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a two-second visual pause cue before the child can grab or answer to practice stopping the first impulse.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
There is a substantial amount of data providing evidence for, but also against the hypothesis that individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) encounter inhibitory control deficits. ASD is often associated with interference control deficits rather than prepotent response inhibition. Moreover, the developmental trajectory for these inhibitory control processes is hypothesized to differ in ASD as compared to typical development. In efforts to gain a more comprehensive perspective of inhibition in ASD, separate quantitative analysis for prepotent response inhibition studies and interference control studies were conducted. Together, these two meta-analyses included 41 studies with a combined sample size of 1,091 people with ASD (M age 14.8 years), and 1,306 typically developing (TD) controls (M age 13.8 years).The meta-analyses indicated that individuals with ASD show increased difficulties in prepotent response inhibition (effect size 0.55) and in interference control (effect size 0.31). In addition, age was a relevant moderator for prepotent response inhibition but not for interference control. Exploratory analyses revealed that when IQ was taken into account, heterogeneity considerably decreased among interference control studies but not among prepotent response inhibition. In contrast to the general belief, both prepotent response inhibition and interference control problems were observed in individuals with ASD. However, a large variation between studies was also found. Therefore, there remain factors beyond inhibition type, age, or IQ that significantly influence inhibitory control performance among individuals with ASD.
Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 2014 · doi:10.1002/aur.1369