The surface structure and the deep structure of sequential control: What can we learn from task span switch costs?

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 693-698

  Mayr, Ulrich ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; COLOR VISION; HUMAN; LEARNING; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

COGNITION; COLOR PERCEPTION; CUES; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SERIAL LEARNING;

EID: 78149430221     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.17.5.693     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Altmann, E. M. (2006). Task switching is not cue switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 1016-1022.
2. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15, 610-615.
3. 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, & Cognition, 33, 484-502.
4. 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.
5. Bryck, R. L., & Mayr, U. (2005). On the role of verbalization during task set selection: Switching or serial order control? Memory & Cognition, 33, 611-623.
6. Emerson, M. J., & Miyake, A. (2003). The role of inner speech in task switching: A dual-task investigation. Journal of Memory & Language, 48, 148-168.
7. Gotler, A., Meiran, N., & Tzelgov, J. (2003). Nonintentional task set activation: Evidence from implicit task sequence learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 890-896.
8. Jost, K., Mayr, U., & Rösler, F. (2008). Is task switching nothing but cue priming? Evidence from ERPs. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 74-84.
9. Koch, I. (2003). The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 488-492.
10. 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: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 697-713.
11. Logan, G. D. (2003). Executive control of thought and action: In search of the wild homunculus. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 45-48.
12. Logan, G. D. (2004). Working memory, task switching, and executive control in the task span procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 218-236.
13. 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.
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., & Schneider, D. W. (2006). Interpreting instructional cues in task switching procedures: The role of mediator retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 347-363.
16. Mayr, U. (2003). Towards principles of executive control: How mental sets are selected. In R. H. Kluwe, G. Luer, & F. Rösler (Eds.), Principles of learning and memory (pp. 223-240). Basel: Birkhäuser.
17. Mayr, U. (2006). What matters in the cued task-switching paradigm: Tasks or cues? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 794-799.
18. Mayr, U. (2009). Sticky plans: Inhibition and binding during serial task control. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 123-153.
19. Mayr, U., & Bell, T. (2006). On how to be unpredictable: Evidence from the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Psychological Science, 17, 774-780.
20. Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4-26.
21. 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.
22. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
23. Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134-140.
24. 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.
25. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
26. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2006). Hierarchical control of cognitive processes: Switching tasks in sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 623-640.
27. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (in press). Task-switching performance with 1:1 and 2:1 cue-task mappings: Not so different after all. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition.
28. Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99-174). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.