Switch costs and the operand-recognition paradigm

Experimental research in cognitive arithmetic frequently relies on participants’ self-reports to discriminate solutions based on direct memory retrieval from use of procedural strategies. Given concerns about the validity and reliability of strategy reports, Thevenot et al. in Mem Cogn 35:1344–1352, (2007) developed the operand-recognition paradigm as an objective measure of arithmetic strategies. Participants performed addition or number comparison on two sequentially presented operands followed by a speeded operand-recognition task. Recognition times increased with problem size following addition but not comparison. Thevenot et al. argued that the complexity of addition strategies increases with problem size. A corresponding increase in operand-recognition time occurs because, as problem size increases, working memory contains more numerical distracters. However, because addition is substantially more difficult than comparison, and difficulty increases with problem size for addition but not comparison, their findings could be due to difficulty-related task-switching costs. We repeated Thevenot et al. (Experiment 1) but added a control condition wherein participants performed a parity (odd or even) task instead of operand recognition. We replicated their findings for operand recognition but found robust, albeit smaller, effects of addition problem size on parity judgements. The results indicate that effects of strategy complexity in the operand-recognition paradigm are confounded with task-switching effects, which complicates its application as a precise measure of strategy complexity in arithmetic.