Stimulus-category and response-repetition effects in task switching: An evaluation of four explanations

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 125-146

  Druey, Michel D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Association learning; Episodic retrieval; Priming and inhibition; Reconfiguration; Sequential effects

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; SELF REPORT; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SELF REPORT; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84890918152     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0033868     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Altmann, E. M. (2011). Testing probability matching and episodic retrieval accounts of response repetition effects in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 935- 951. doi:10.1037/a0022931
2. Arbuthnott, K. D. (1996). To repeat or not to repeat: Repetition facilitation and inhibition in sequential retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 261-283. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.125.3.261
3. Baddeley, A., Emslie, H., Kolodny, J., & Duncan, J. (1998). Random generation and the executive control of working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 51(A), 819-852.
4. 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. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.09.005
5. 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. doi:10.1037/0278- 7393.19.6.1345
6. Cooper, S., & Mari-Beffa, P. (2008). The role of response repetition in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1198-1211. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1198
7. Dreisbach, G., Goschke, T., & Haider, H. (2007). The role of task rules and stimulus-response mappings in the task switching paradigm. Psychological Research, 71, 383-392. doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0041-3
8. Druey, M. D., & Hübner, R. (2008). Response inhibition under task switching: Its strength depends on the amount of task-irrelevant response activation. Psychological Research, 72, 515-527. doi:10.1007/s00426- 007-0127-1
9. Ells, J. G., & Gotts, G. H. (1977). Serial reaction time as a function of the nature of repeated events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 234-242. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.3.2 .234
10. Grzyb, K. R., & Hübner, R. (2012). Response-repetition costs in task switching: How they are modulated by previous-trial response-category activation. Acta Psychologica, 139, 97-103. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011 .10.006
11. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5, 183-216. doi:10.1080/ 713756773
12. Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494-500. doi:10.1016/j.tics .2004.08.007
13. Hommel, B. (2007). Feature integration across perception and action: Event files affect response choice. Psychological Research, 71, 42-63. doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0035-1
14. Hommel, B. (2009). Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychological Research, 73, 512-526. doi:10.1007/s00426- 009-0234-2
15. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-878. doi:10.1017/ S0140525X01000103
16. 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, CA: Academic Press.
17. 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. doi:10.1007/ s00426-005-0219-8
18. Hübner, R., & Druey, M. D. (2008). Multiple response codes play specific roles in response selection and inhibition under task switching. Psychological Research, 72, 415-424. doi:10.1007/s00426-007-0118-2
19. Juvina, I., & Taatgen, N. A. (2009). A repetition-suppression account of between-trial effects in a modified Stroop paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 131, 72-84. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.03.002
20. Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching-a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874. doi:10.1037/a0019842
21. Kleinsorge, T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psychologica, 103, 295-310. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00047-5
22. Kleinsorge, T. (2004). Hierarchical switching with two types of judgment and two stimulus dimensions. Experimental Psychology, 51, 145-149. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.51.2.145
23. Kleinsorge, T., & Heuer, H. (1999). Hierarchical switching in a multidimensional task space. Psychological Research, 62, 300-312. doi: 10.1007/s004260050060
24. Koch, I., Schuch, S., Vu, K.-P. L., & Proctor, R. W. (2011). Responserepetition effects in task switching-Dissociating effects of anatomical and spatial response discriminability. Acta Psychologica, 136, 399-404. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.01.006
25. Lehle, C., Cohen, A., Sangals, J., Sommer, W., & Stürmer, B. (2011). Differential dynamics of spatial and non-spatial stimulus-response compatibility effects: A dual task LRP study. Acta Psychologica, 136, 42-51. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.013
26. Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476-490. doi:10.3758/BF03210951
27. 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 and Performance, 29, 575-599. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.575
28. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.393
29. Mayr, U., & Bryck, R. L. (2005). Sticky rules: Integration between abstract rules and specific actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 337-350. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.2 .337
30. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1124-1140. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.5.1124
31. 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. doi:10.1037/0278- 7393.29.3.362
32. Meiran, N. (2000). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249. doi:10.1007/s004269900004
33. Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211-253. doi:10.1006/cogp.2000 .0736
34. 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. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.137
35. Meiran, N., Kessler, Y., & Adi-Japha, E. (2008). Control by action representation and input selection (CARIS): A theoretical framework for task switching. Psychological Research, 72, 473-500. doi:10.1007/s00426- 008-0136-8
36. Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134-140. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
37. Morey, R. D. (2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 61-64.
38. Oberauer, K. (2009). Design for a working memory. In Brian Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 45-100). Waltham, MA: Academic Press. Retrieved from http://www .sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S007974210951002X
39. Oberauer, K., Souza, A. S., Druey, M. D., & Gade, M. (2013). Analogous mechanisms of selection and updating in declarative and procedural working memory: Experiments and a computational model. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 157-211. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.11.001
40. 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. doi:10.1037/0278- 7393.17.1.33
41. Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2005). Switching of response modalities. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 58(A), 1325-1338. doi:10.1080/02724980443000656
42. Quinlan, P. T. (1999). Sequential effects in auditory choice reaction time tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 297-303. doi:10.3758/ BF03212333
43. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207
44. Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 763-797. doi:10.1037/ 0096-1523.27.4.763
45. 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. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.3.566
46. Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2010). Response-repetition effects in task switching with and without response execution. Acta Psychologica, 135, 302- 309. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.016
47. Smith, M. C. (1968). Repetition effect and short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 435-439. doi:10.1037/h0021293
48. Sohn, M.-H., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Task preparation and task repetition: Two-component model of task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 764-778. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.764
49. 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. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.517
50. 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. doi:10.3758/BF03192779
51. Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601-626. doi:10.1037/a0019791