Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-03-2015 | Original Paper

Differential contribution of task conflicts to task switch cost and task mixing cost in alternating runs and cued task-switching: evidence from ex-Gaussian modeling of reaction time distributions

Auteurs: Nitzan Shahar, Nachshon Meiran

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2015

Abstract

Task switching involves switch cost (poorer performance switch trials than in task-repetition trials) and mixing cost (poorer performance in task-repetition trials than in trials from blocks without task switching). These are mainly studied with the alternating runs task-switching (ARTS) paradigm (in which the task changes every constant number of trials) or the cued task-switching (CTS) paradigm, in which the tasks change randomly. The authors tested the hypothesis that dealing with actual or potential conflicts regarding which task is currently required contribute to mixing cost in CTS more than in ARTS and contribute to switch costs more in ARTS than in CTS. This hypothesis was tested using ex-Gaussian modeling of reaction time (RT) distributions, in which the heaviness of the right tail marks task conflicts (Steinhauser and Hübner in J Exp Psychol Human Percept Perform 35:1398–1412 2009). As predicted, a heavier RT-distribution tail marked switch cost more strongly in ARTS than in CTS and marked mixing costs more strongly in CTS than in ARTS. These results indicate that switch cost and mixing cost reflect different processes in different task-switching paradigms.

vorige artikel Voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation is associated with stopping success: evidence from LRP and lateralized mu ERD before the stop signal

volgende artikel Encoding and choice in the task span paradigm

Altmann, E. M. (2007). Comparing switch costs: alternating runs and explicit cuing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 475–483.CrossRefPubMed

Altmann, E. M. (2013). Fine-grain episodic memory processes in cognitive control. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 221, 23–32.CrossRef

Altmann, E. M., & Gray, W. D. (2008). An integrated model of cognitive control in task switching. Psychological Review, 115, 602–639.CrossRefPubMed

Andreadis, N., & Quinlan, P. T. (2010). Task switching under predictable and unpredictable circumstances. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 1776–1790.CrossRef

Braver, T. S., Reynolds, J. R., & Donaldson, D. I. (2003). Neural mechanisms of transient and sustained cognitive control during task switching. Neuron, 39, 713–726.CrossRefPubMed

Braverman, A., & Meiran, N. (2010). Task conflict effect in task switching. Psychological Research, 74, 568–578.CrossRefPubMed

Fagot, C. (1994). Chronometric investigation of task switching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.

Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: a PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297–337.CrossRefPubMed

Goldfarb, L., & Henik, A. (2007). Evidence for task conflict in the Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1170–1176.PubMed

Hollands, J. G., & Jarmasz, J. (2010). Revisiting confidence intervals for repeated measures designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 135–138.CrossRef

Jarmasz, J., & Hollands, J. G. (2009). Confidence intervals in repeated-measures designs: the number of observations principle. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 124–138.CrossRefPubMed

Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, 14(89), 81.

Kessler, Y., & Meiran, N. (2010). The reaction-time task-rule congruency effect is not affected by working memory load: further support for the activated long-term memory hypothesis. Psychological Research, 74, 388–399.CrossRefPubMed

Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., et al. (2010). Control and interference in task switching: a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874.CrossRefPubMed

Kiesel, A., Wendt, M., & Peters, A. (2007). Task switching: on the origin of response congruency effects. Psychological Research, 71, 117–125.CrossRefPubMed

Koch, I. (2003). The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 488–492.CrossRef

Koch, I. (2005). Sequential task predictability in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 107–112.CrossRef

Koch, I., Prinz, W., & Allport, A. (2005). Involuntary retrieval in alphabet–arithmetic tasks: task-mixing and task-switching costs. Psychological Research, 69, 252–261.CrossRefPubMed

Kray, J., & Lindenberger, U. (2000). Adult age differences in task switching. Psychology and Aging, 15, 126–147.CrossRefPubMed

Lacouture, Y., & Cousineau, D. (2008). How to use MATLAB to fit the ex-Gaussian and other probability functions to a distribution of response times. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 35–45.

Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.CrossRef

Meiran, N. (2010). Task switching: Mechanisms underlying rigid vs. flexible self control. In R. Hassin, K. Ochsner, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Self control in society, mind and brain (pp. 202–220). NY: Oxford University Press.

Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211–253.CrossRefPubMed

Meiran, N., & Daichman, A. (2005). Advance task preparation reduces task error rate in the cueing task-switching paradigm. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1272–1288.CrossRefPubMed

Meiran, N., Gotler, A., & Perlman, A. (2001). Old age is associated with a pattern of relatively intact and relatively impaired task-set switching abilities. Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences B, 56, 88–102.CrossRef

Meiran, N., & Kessler, Y. (2008). The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 137–157.PubMed

Meiran, N., Kessler, Y., & Adi-Japha, E. (2008). Control by Action Representation and Input Selection (CARIS): a theoretical framework for task switching. Psychological Research, 72, 473–500.CrossRefPubMed

Monsell, S. (2003). Task Switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140.CrossRefPubMed

Monsell, S., Sumner, P., & Waters, H. (2003). Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Memory & Cognition, 31, 327–342.CrossRef

Pereg, M., Shahar, N., & Meiran, N. (2013). Task-switching training effects are mediated by working-memory management. Intelligence, 41, 467–478.CrossRef

Ratcliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510–532.CrossRefPubMed

Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.CrossRef

Rubin, O., & Meiran, N. (2005). On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1477–1491.CrossRefPubMed

Schmiedek, F., Oberauer, K., Wilhelm, O., Suss, H. M., & Wittmann, W. W. (2007). Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 13, 414–429.CrossRef

Schmitz, F., & Voss, A. (2012). Decomposing task-switching costs with the diffusion model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 222–250.PubMed

Shaffer, L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 284–288.CrossRefPubMed

Steinhauser, M., & Hübner, R. (2009). Distinguishing response conflict and task conflict in the Stroop task: evidence from ex-Gaussian distribution analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1398–1412.PubMed

Tornay, F. J., & Milán, E. G. (2001). A more complete task-set reconfiguration in random than in predictable task switch. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 785–803.CrossRef

van ‘t Wout, F., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2013). Are stimulus-response rules represented phonologically for task-set preparation and maintenance? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1538–1551.CrossRefPubMed

Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: interplay of reconfiguration and interference. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601–626.CrossRefPubMed

Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long term priming: role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413.CrossRefPubMed

Woodward, T. S., Meier, B., Tipper, C., & Graf, P. (2003). Bivalency is costly: bivalent stimuli elicit cautious responding. Experimental Psychology, 50, 233–238.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Differential contribution of task conflicts to task switch cost and task mixing cost in alternating runs and cued task-switching: evidence from ex-Gaussian modeling of reaction time distributions
Auteurs: Nitzan Shahar
Nachshon Meiran
Publicatiedatum: 01-03-2015
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0569-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2015

The benefit of no choice: goal-directed plans enhance perceptual processing

Crossmodal encoding of motor sequence memories

Voluntarily-generated unimanual preparation is associated with stopping success: evidence from LRP and lateralized mu ERD before the stop signal

How does implicit learning of search regularities alter the manner in which you search?

A Stroop effect emerges in the processing of complex Chinese characters that contain a color-related radical

Quantifying transfer after perceptual-motor sequence learning: how inflexible is implicit learning?