On the representation of task information in task switching: Evidence from task and dimension switching

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 36, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1248-1261

  Vandierendonck, André ^a   Christiaens, Evelien ^a   Liefooghe, Baptist ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME; REVERSAL LEARNING; SET (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 54949124928     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/MC.36.7.1248     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ALLPORT, D. A., STYLES, E. A., & HSIEH, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. ALTMANN, E. M. (2004). Advance preparation in task switching: What work is being done? Psychological Science, 15, 616-622.
3. DEHAENE, S., BOSSINI, S., & GIRAUX, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
4. DIXON, P., & JUST, M. A. (1986). A chronometric analysis of strategy preparation in choice reactions. Memory & Cognition, 14, 488-500.
5. GOSCHKE, T. (2000). Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task set switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 331-355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. HÜBNER, R., FUTTERER, T., & STEINHAUSER, M. (2001). On attentional control as a source of residual shift costs: Evidence from two-component task shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 640-653.
7. JERSILD, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, 14, 1-81.
8. KLEINSORGE, T. (2004). Hierarchical switching with two types of judgment and two stimulus dimensions. Experimental Psychology, 51, 145-149.
9. KLEINSORGE, T., & HEUER, H. (1999). Hierarchical switching in a multidimensional task space. Psychological Research, 62, 300-312.
10. KLEINSORGE, T., HEUER, H., & SCHMIDTKE, V. (2001). Task-set reconfiguration with binary and three-valued task dimensions. Psychological Research, 65, 192-201.
11. KLEINSORGE, T., HEUER, H., & SCHMIDTKE, V. (2002). Processes of task-set reconfiguration: Switching operations and implementation operations. Acta Psychologica, 111, 1-28.
12. KLEINSORGE, T., HEUER, H., & SCHMIDTKE, V. (2004). Assembling a task space: Global determination of local shift costs. Psychological Research, 68, 31-40.
13. LIEFOOGHE, B., CHRISTIAENS, E., & VANDIERENDONCK, A. (2008). Does the composition of the cue information influence the representation of the task-set components in task switching? Manuscript in preparation.
14. 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 & Performance, 29, 575-599.
15. LOGAN, G. D., & BUNDESEN, C. (2004). Very clever homunculus: Compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 832-840.
16. LOGAN, G. D., & GORDON, R. D. (2001). Executive control of attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
17. LOGAN, G. D., & ZBRODOFF, N. J. (2003). Subitizing and similarity: Toward a pattern-matching theory of enumeration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 676-682.
18. MAYR, U., & KLIEGL, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 1124-1140.
19. MAYR, U., & KLIEGL, R. (2003). Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 362-372.
20. MEIRAN, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
21. MEIRAN, N. (2000). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
22. MONSELL, S., & MIZON, G. A. (2006). Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 493-516.
23. NAVON, D. (1977). Forest before trees: Precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353-383.
24. ROGERS, R. D., & MONSELL, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
25. 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 & Performance, 30, 566-582.
26. SPECTOR, A., & BIEDERMAN, I. (1976). Mental set and mental shift revisited. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 669-679.
27. STEINHAUSER, M., & HÜBNER, R. (2005). Mixing costs in task shifting reflect sequential processing stages in a multicomponent task. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1484-1494.
28. STEINHAUSER, M., & HÜBNER, R. (2007). Automatic activation of taskrelated representations in task shifting. Memory & Cognition, 35, 138-155.
29. STEVENS, M., LAMMERTYN, J., VERBRUGGEN, F., & VANDIERENDONCK, A. (2006). Tscope: A C library for programming cognitive experiments on the MS Windows platform. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 280-286.
30. SUDEVAN, P., & TAYLOR, D. A. (1987). The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 13, 89-103.
31. TRICK, L. N. (2005). The role of working memory in spatial enumeration: Patterns of selective interference in subitizing and counting. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 675-681.
32. TRICK, L. N., & PYLYSHYN, Z. W. (1994). Why are large and small numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. Psychological Review, 101, 80-102.
33. WASZAK, F., HOMMEL, B., & ALLPORT, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in taskshift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361-413.
34. WASZAK, F., HOMMEL, B., & ALLPORT, A. (2004). Semantic generalization of stimulus-task bindings. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1027-1033.
35. WASZAK, F., HOMMEL, B., & ALLPORT, A. (2005). Interaction of task readiness and automatic retrieval in task switching: Negative priming and competitor priming. Memory & Cognition, 33, 595-610.