Response inhibition under task switching: Its strength depends on the amount of task-irrelevant response activation

Psychological Research

Volumn 72, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 515-527

  Druey, Michel D ^a   Hübner, Ronald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KONSTANZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); JUDGMENT; MALE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 46349102745     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-007-0127-1     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624-652.
2. Brown, J. W., Reynolds, J. R., & Braver, T. S. (2007). A computational model of fractionated conflict-control mechanisms in task-switching. Cognitive Psychology, 55, 37-85.
3. Campbell, K. C., & Proctor, R. W. (1993). Repetition effects with categorizable stimulus and response sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1345-1362.
4. De Jong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 357-376). Cambridge: MIT.
5. De Jong, R., Liang, C. C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731-750.
6. Egner, T., & Hirsch, J. (2005). Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1784-1790.
7. Eimer, M. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and automatic response activation: Evidence from psychophysiological studies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 837-854.
8. Forstmann, B. U., Brass, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Methodological and empirical issues when dissociating cue-related from task-related processes in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychological Research, 71, 393-400.
9. Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297-337.
10. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270-279.
11. Hommel, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 764-775.
12. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183-216.
13. Houghton, G., & Tipper, S. P. (1994). A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In D. Dagenbach, T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53-112). San Diego: Academic.
14. Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2006). Response execution, selection, or activation: What is sufficient for response-related repetition effects under task shifting? Psychological Research, 70, 245-261.
15. Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2007). Multiple response codes play specific roles in response selection and inhibition under task shifting. Psychological Research. (in press).
16. Kleinsorge, T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psychologica, 103, 295-310.
17. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
18. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
19. Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174-207.
20. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2003). Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 362-372.
21. Meiran, N. (2000a). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
22. Meiran, N. (2000b). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 377-399). Cambridge: MIT.
23. Meiran N. (2005). Task rule-congruency and Simon-like effects in switching between spatial tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1023-1041.
24. Meiran N., Chorev Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211-253.
25. Notebaert W., & Soetens, E. (2003). The influence of irrelevant stimulus changes on stimulus and response repetition effects. Acta Psychologica, 112, 143-156.
26. Notebaert W., Soetens E., & Melis, A. (2001). Sequential analysis of a Simon task - evidence for an attention-shift account. Psychological Research, 65, 170-184.
27. Pashler H., & Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 2. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 33-48.
28. Ridderinkhof, K. R. (1997). A dual-route processing architecture for stimulus-response correspondence effects. In B. Hommel, W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 119-131). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
29. Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: Activation and suppression in conflict tasks. Psychological Research, 66, 312-323.
30. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
31. Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2004). The costs of changing the representation of action: Response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 566-582.
32. Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174-176.
33. Smith, M. C. (1968). Repetition effect and short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 435-439.
34. Soetens, E. (1998). Localizing sequential effects in serial choice reaction time with the information reduction procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 547-568.
35. Soetens, E., Melis, A., & Notebaert, W. (2004). Sequence learning and sequential effects. Psychological Research, 69, 124-137.
36. Steinhauser, M., & Hübner, R. (2006). Response-based strengthening in task shifting: Evidence from shift effects produced by errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 517-534.
37. Stürmer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schroeter, H., & Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1345-1363.
38. Stürmer, B., Seiss, E., & Leuthold, H. (2005). Executive control in the Simon task: A dual-task examination of response priming and its suppression. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 590-618.
39. Wühr, P., & Ansorge, U. (2005). Exploring trial-by-trial modulations of the Simon effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 705-731.