Currently, we have various findings, with no consensus. However, no study so far has manipulated WM and IC within the same task domain. Here we present, for the first time, a set of novel ASTs that attempt to manipulate the IC and WM processes independently within the AST. This was achieved by two simple manipulations: First, using a memory-guided condition, the memory-load was increased, while removing the usual inhibition of a saccade towards the prepotent target. Memory load was increased by introducing five “to-be-remembered” possible target locations that were embedded within an array of distracters; critically the inhibitory element was simultaneously minimized by the requirement to fixate the target immediately at presentation, before then returning back to the central fixation point ready for the subsequent AST away from the remembered target. By allowing the observer to fixate the target at the time of presentation, the typical requirement to inhibit the saccade to the prepotent target was removed (Figure 1). In a second condition (go/no-go), inhibition was increased while simultaneously minimizing the memory load. In the go/no-go task, participants were presented with an initial fixation stimulus, followed by either a ‘go’ cue (green light) or a ‘no-go’ cue (red cross), before the onset of a target stimulus. On trials where a ‘go’ cue is presented, participants must make a saccadic eye movement to the target (prosaccade) or away from the target (antisaccade). In trials where a ‘no-go’ cue is presented, participants must maintain fixation on the fixation stimulus (i.e., must refrain from making a saccadic eye movement towards or away from the target). Go/no-go paradigms are known to increase inhibition errors, even beyond the standard AST (see Crawford et al., 2005). Critically, the WM load was minimized by presenting a clear visual arrow marker that pointed towards to the correct direction on the “Go” trials, thus eliminating the need to keep this location in mind (Figure 1). We employed variants of the AST to selectively load IC or WM, to compare performance on these tasks with performance on the standard AST, across two age groups. Performance was assessed in terms of latencies of correct saccades, spatial accuracy, and the proportion of directionally erroneous saccades on the ASTs (i.e., saccades towards the target, rather than away from the target). The aim was to clarify the extent to which the previously documented age-related impairments on the AST are affected by spatial WM deficits, in contrast to the inhibition of a prepotent response. The AST-go/no-go was designed to assess the effect of an inhibitory load (specifically the ability to successfully inhibit the “urge to go” in the no-go condition), while the memory-guided AST conditions assessed the effect of an increased load on WM. A standard version of the AST (AST-s) acted as a baseline assessment of saccadic performance. The gap paradigm (i.e., where the fixation point is removed 200 ms before the target is presented) was employed in all tasks so as to reduce the possibility of floor effects, whereby the tasks are insufficiently taxing as to elicit any errors from the participants. Including such a temporal gap in eye movement studies increases the distraction error probability in AST trials (Saslow, 1967; Fischer and Weber, 1992; Dorris and Munoz, 1995; Eenshuistra et al., 2004). Kimberg and Farah (2000) proposed in their model that IC was simply an expression or by-product of WM; in other words IC is not a distinct cognitive operation. However, using a single case study methodology, Crawford and Higham (2016) recently discovered evidence for independence and modularity. In this study, we assess IC and WM as part of the cognitive operations underpinning antisaccades in both young and older participants. Saccade latencies and error rates of saccades of older participants were compared to the same measures in healthy young controls.