Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-03-2015 | Original Article

Encoding and choice in the task span paradigm

Auteurs: Kaitlin M. Reiman, Starla M. Weaver, Catherine M. Arrington

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2015

Abstract

Cognitive control during sequences of planned behaviors requires both plan-level processes such as generating, maintaining, and monitoring the plan, as well as task-level processes such as selecting, establishing and implementing specific task sets. The task span paradigm (Logan in J Exp Psychol Gen 133:218–236, 2004) combines two common cognitive control paradigms, task switching and working memory span, to investigate the integration of plan-level and task-level processes during control of sequential behavior. The current study expands past task span research to include measures of encoding processes and choice behavior with volitional sequence generation, using the standard task span as well as a novel voluntary task span paradigm. In two experiments, we consider how sequence complexity, defined separately for plan-level and task-level complexity, influences sequence encoding (Experiment 1), sequence choice (Experiment 2), sequence memory, and task performance of planned sequences of action. Results indicate that participants were sensitive to sequence complexity, but that different aspects of behavior are most strongly influenced by different types of complexity. Hierarchical complexity at the plan level best predicts voluntary sequence generation and memory; while switch frequency at the task level best predicts encoding of externally defined sequences and task performance. Furthermore, performance RTs were similar for externally and internally defined plans, whereas memory was improved for internally defined sequences. Finally, participants demonstrated a significant sequence choice bias in the voluntary task span. Consistent with past research on choice behavior, volitional selection of plans was markedly influenced by both the ease of memory and performance.

vorige artikel 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

volgende artikel Preferred, but not objective temperature predicts working memory depletion

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Analyzing memory according to recall for individual tasks as opposed to full sequences yielded similar results.

While subjects for Experiments 1 and 2 were selected at random from the same pool of participants, the two experiments were run sequentially and thus differences in testing environment (e.g., time of year) may be confounded with experiment in these comparisons. Given the correspondence between the current findings and past research on the generation effect, we believe that any such confound is unlikely to be the cause of the current differences.

Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (Vol. 15, pp. 421–452). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15, 610–615.CrossRefPubMed

Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Voluntary task switching: Chasing the elusive homunculus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 683–702.PubMed

Arrington, C. M., Logan, G. D., & Schneider, D. W. (2007). Separating cue encoding from target processing in the explicit task-cuing procedure: are there “true” task switch effects? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 484–502.PubMed

Baddeley, A., Chincotta, D., & Adlam, A. (2001). Working memory and the control of action: Evidence from task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 641–657.CrossRef

Brass, M., & Haggard, P. (2008). The what, when, whether model of intentional action. The Neuroscientist, 14, 319–325.CrossRefPubMed

Chechile, R. A., & Soraci, S. A. (1999). Evidence for a multiple-process account of the generation effect. Memory, 7, 483–508.CrossRef

Demanet, J., Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2010). Voluntary task switching under load: Contribution of top-down and bottom-up factors in goal-directed behavior. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 387–393.CrossRef

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

Keller, P. E., Wascher, E., Prinz, W., Waszak, F., Koch, I., & Rosenbaum, D. A. (2006). Differences between intention-based and stimulus-based actions. Journal of Psychophysiology, 20, 9–20.CrossRef

Kessler, Y., Shencar, Y., & Meiran, N. (2009). Choosing to switch: Spontaneous task switching despite associated behavioral costs. Acta Psychologica, 131, 120–128.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

Kleinsorge, T., & Gajewski, P. D. (2008). Task switching based on externally presented versus internally generated information. Psychological Research, 72, 501–514.CrossRefPubMed

Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34, 433–444.CrossRef

Kool, W., McGuire, J. T., Rosen, Z. B., & Botvinick, M. M. (2010). Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 665–682.CrossRef

Krieghoff, V., Waszak, F., Prinz, W., & Brass, M. (2011). Neural and behavioral correlates of intentional actions. Neuropsychologia, 49, 767–776.CrossRefPubMed

Liefooghe, B., Barrouillet, P., Vandierendonck, A., & Camos, V. (2008). Working memory costs of task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 478–494.PubMed

Lien, M.-C., & Ruthruff, E. (2004). Task switching in a hierarchical task structure: Evidence for the fragility of the task repetition benefit. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 697–713.PubMed

Logan, G. D. (2004). Working memory, task switching, and executive control in the task span procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 218–236.CrossRef

Logan, G. D. (2006). Out with the old, in with the new: More valid measures of switch cost and retrieval time in the task span procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 139–144.CrossRef

Logan, G. D. (2007). What it costs to implement a plan: Plan-level and task-level contributions to switch costs. Memory & Cognition, 35, 591–602.CrossRef

Logan, G. D., & Bundesen, C. (2003). Clever homunculus: Is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task cuing procedure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 575–599.PubMed

Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393–434.CrossRefPubMed

Mayr, U. (2010). The surface structure and the deep structure of sequential control: What can we learn from task span switch costs? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 693–698.CrossRef

Mayr, U., & Bell, T. (2006). On how to be unpredictable: Evidence from the voluntary task switching paradigm. Psychological Science, 17, 774–780.CrossRefPubMed

Oberauer, K., Souza, A. S., Druey, M. D., & Gade, M. (2013). Analogous mechanisms of selection and updating in declarative and procedural working memory: Experiments and a computational model. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 157–211.CrossRefPubMed

Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163.CrossRef

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

Scalf, P. E., Dux, P. E., & Marois, R. (2011). Working memory encoding delays top-down attention to visual cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 2593–2604.CrossRefPubMed

Simon, H. (1972). Complexity and the representation of patterned sequences of symbols. Psychological Review, 79, 369–382.CrossRef

Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Hyman Learning and Memory, 4, 592–604.

Vandierendonck, A. (2012). Role of working memory in task switching. Psychologica Belgica, 52, 229–253.CrossRef

Vandierendonck, A., Demanet, J., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2012). A chain-retrieval model for voluntary task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 65, 241–283.CrossRefPubMed

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

Wagner, A. D., Schacter, D. L., Rotte, M., Koutstaal, W., Maril, A., Dale, A. M., et al. (1998). Building memories: Remembering and forgetting of verbal experiences as predicted by brain activity. Science, 281, 1188–1191.CrossRefPubMed

Woodman, G. F., & Vogel, E. K. (2005). Fractionating working memory: Memory encoding and maintenance are independent processes. Psychological Science, 16, 106–113.CrossRefPubMed

Yeung, N. (2010). Bottom-up influences on voluntary task switching: The elusive homunculus escapes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 348–362.PubMed

Titel: Encoding and choice in the task span paradigm
Auteurs: Kaitlin M. Reiman
Starla M. Weaver
Catherine M. Arrington
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/s00426-014-0556-6

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2015

Mental representations derived from spatial descriptions: the influence of orientation specificity and visuospatial abilities

Task predictability influences the variable foreperiod effect: evidence of task-specific temporal preparation

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

Conflict control in task conflict and response conflict

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

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