Stimulus-related inhibition of task set during task switching

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 55, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 322-327

  Sdoia, Stefano ^a   Ferlazzo, Fabio ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cognitive control; Inhibition; Response selection; Stimulus processing; Task switching

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; HUMAN; INHIBITION; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MENTAL FUNCTION; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; RESPONSE SELECTION; STIMULUS PROCESSING; TASK SWITCHING;

COGNITIVE CONTROL; INHIBITION; RESPONSE SELECTION; STIMULUS PROCESSING; TASK SWITCHING;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COGNITION; CUES; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MENTAL PROCESSES; PERCEPTION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 54149097770     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169.55.5.322     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Allport, A., & Wylie, G. (2000). Task switching, stimulus-response bindings, and negative priming. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 35-70). Cambridge, MA: MTT Press.
2. Allport, D.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 XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Arbuthnott, K.D. (2005). The influence of cue type on backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1030-1042.
4. Arbuthnott, K.D., & Woodward, T.S. (2002). The influence of cuetask association and location on switch cost and alternatingswitch cost. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 18-29.
5. Arbuthnott, K., & Frank, J. (2000). Executive control in set switching: residual switch cost and task-set inhibition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 33-41.
6. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
7. Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87, 87-95.
8. Hübner, M., Dreisbach, G., Haider, H., & Kluwe, R.H. (2003). Backward inhibition as a means of sequential task-set control: evidence for reduction of task competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 289-297.
9. Jolicoeur, P., & Dell'Acqua, R. (1998). The demonstration of shortterm consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36,138-202.
10. Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34, 433-444.
11. Koch, I., & Prinz, W. (2002). Process interference and code overlap in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 192-201.
12. Mayr, U. (2002). Inhibition of action rules. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 93-99.
13. Mayr, U., & Keele, S.W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4-26.
14. Meiran, N. (2000a). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 377-399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Meiran, N. (2000b). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
16. Rogers, R.D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
17. Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 92-105.
18. Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Selective stopping in task switching: The role of response selection and response execution. Experimental Psychology, 53, 48-57.
19. Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., Szmalec, A., & Vandierendonck, A. (2005). Inhibiting responses when switching: Does it matter? Experimental Psychology, 52, 125-130.
20. Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic S-R bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361-413.
21. Wylie, G.R., Javitt, D.C., & Foxe, J.J. (2003). Cognitive control processes during an anticipated switch of task. European Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 667-672.