Irrelevant stimulus processing when switching between tasks

Zeitschrift fur Psychologie / Journal of Psychology

Volumn 221, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 41-50

  Wendt, Mike ^a   Kiese, Andrea ^b   Mathew, Hanna ^b   Luna Rodriguez, Aquiles ^a   Jacobsen, Thomas ^a  

^a HELMUT SCHMIDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Congruency effects; Interference; Irrelevant stimuli; Stimulus processing; Task switching

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876362461     PISSN: 21908370     EISSN: 21512604     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000129     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371-396.
5. de Fockert, J. W., Rees, G., Frith, C., & Lavie, N. (2001). The role of working memory in visual selective attention. Science, 291, 1803-1806.
6. Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2008). That's what task sets are for: Shielding against irrelevant information. Psychological Research, 72, 355-361.
7. Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2009). How task representations guide attention: Further evidence for the shielding function of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 477-486.
8. Dreisbach, G., & Wenke, D. (2011). The shielding function of task sets and its relaxation during task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 37, 1540-1546.
9. Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 374- 380.
10. Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149.
11. Fagot, C.-A. (1994). Chronometric investigations of task switching (Ph.D. dissertation). University of California, San Diego.
12. Fias, W. (2001). Two routes for the processing of verbal numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Psychological Research, 65, 250-259.
13. Fischer, R., Plessow, F., Kunde, W., & Kiesel, A. (2010). Trialto- trial modulations of the Simon effect in conditions of attentional limitations: Evidence from dual-tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1576-1594.
14. Funes, M. J., Lupianez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010a). Sustained vs transient cognitive control: Evidence of a behavioural dissociation. Cognition, 114, 338-347.
15. Funes, M. J., Lupianez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010b). Analyzing the generality of conflict adaptation effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 147-161.
16. Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297-337.
17. Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2006). Response execution, selection, or activation: What is sufficient for responserelated repetition effects under task shifting? Psychological Research, 70, 245-261.
18. Hübner, R., Futterer, T.,&Steinhauser, M. (2001). On attentional control as source of residual shift costs: Evidence from twocomponent task shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 640-653.
19. Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2006). Evidence for task-specific resolution of response conflict. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 800-806.
20. Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Phillip, A., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching - a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874.
21. Kiesel, A., Wendt, M., & Peters, A. (2007). Task Switching: On the origins of response congruency effects. Psychological Research, 71, 117-125.
22. Kiesel, A., & Vierck, E. (2009). SNARC-like congruency based on number magnitude and response duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 275-279.
23. Koch, I. (2001). Automatic and intentional activation of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1474-1486.
24. Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34, 433-444.
25. Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75-82.
26. Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. (2005). The role of working memory in attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 669-674.
27. Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339-354.
28. Lorch, Jr. R. F., & Myers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 149-157.
29. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
30. Meiran, N. (2000). 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.
31. Meiran, N., & Kessler, Y. (2008). The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 137-157.
32. Müller, D., & Schwarz, W. (2007). Exploring the mental number line: Evidence from a dual-task paradigm. Psychological Research, 71, 598-613.
33. Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition, 106, 1071-1080.
34. Rees, G., Frith, C. D., & Lavie, N. (1997). Modulating irrelevant motion perception by varying attentional load in an unrelated task. Science, 278, 1616-1619.
35. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
36. Rubin, O., & Koch, I. (2006). Exogenous influences on task-set activation in task switching. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1033-1046.
37. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
38. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2006). Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 145- 151.
39. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
40. Stürmer, B., Seiss, E., & Leuthold, H. (2005). Executive control in the Simon task: A dual-task examination of response priming and its suppression. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 590-618.
41. van Dijck, J.-P., Gevers, W., & Fias, W. (2009). Numbers are associated with different types of spatial information depending on the task. Cognition, 113, 148-253.
42. Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601-626.
43. Vierck, E., & Kiesel, A. (2010). Congruency effects between number magnitude and response force. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 204-209.
44. Wendt, M., & Kiesel, A. (2008). The impact of stimulus-specific practice and task instructions on response congruency effects between tasks. Psychological Research, 72, 425-432.
45. Wendt, M., Kluwe, R. H., & Peters, A. (2006). Sequential modulations of interference evoked by processing task-irrelevant stimulus features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 644-667.