Modeling graded response congruency effects in task switching

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 153, Issue , 2014, Pages 160-168

  Schneider, Darryl W ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive modeling; Response congruency; Response selection; Task switching

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ASSOCIATION; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CUES; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84910101742     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.10.006     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Altmann E.M., Gray W.D. An integrated model of cognitive control in task switching. Psychological Review 2008, 115:602-639.
2. Anderson J.R. How can the human mind occur in the physical universe? 2007, Oxford University Press, New York.
3. Arbuthnott K.D. The influence of cue type on backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2005, 31:1030-1042.
4. Arrington C.M., Logan G.D., Schneider D.W. Separating cue encoding from target processing in the explicit task-cuing procedure: Are there "true" task switch effects?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2007, 33:484-502.
5. Bjork R.A. Why mathematical models?. American Psychologist 1973, 28:426-433.
6. Brown J.W., Reynolds J.R., Braver T.S. A computational model of fractionated conflict-control mechanisms in task-switching. Cognitive Psychology 2007, 55:37-85.
7. Cohen J.D., Dunbar K., McClelland J.L. On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review 1990, 97:332-361.
8. Gilbert S.J., Shallice T. Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology 2002, 44:297-337.
9. Goschke T. Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task set switching. Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII 2000, 331-355. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Monsell, J. Driver (Eds.).
10. Grange J.A., Juvina I., Houghton G. On costs and benefits of n-2 repetitions in task switching: Towards a behavioural marker of cognitive inhibition. Psychological Research 2013, 77:211-222.
11. Kessler Y., Meiran N. The reaction-time task-rule congruency effect is not affected by working memory load: Further support for the activated long-term memory hypothesis. Psychological Research 2010, 74:388-399.
12. Kiesel A., Steinhauser M., Wendt M., Falkenstein M., Jost K., Philipp A.M., et al. Control and interference in task switching-A review. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136:849-874.
13. Kiesel A., Wendt M., Peters A. Task switching: On the origin of response congruency effects. Psychological Research 2007, 71:117-125.
14. Koch I., Gade M., Schuch S., Philipp A.M. The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2010, 17:1-14.
15. Liefooghe B., Wenke D., De Houwer J. Instruction-based task-rule congruency effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2012, 38:1325-1335.
16. Logan G.D. Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review 1988, 95:492-527.
17. Logan G.D. Cumulative progress in formal theories of attention. Annual Review of Psychology 2004, 55:207-234.
18. Logan G.D., Bundesen C. Clever homunculus: Is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task-cuing procedure?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:575-599.
19. Logan G.D., Schneider D.W. Priming or executive control? Associative priming of cue encoding increases "switch costs" in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Memory & Cognition 2006, 34:1250-1259.
20. Logan G.D., Schneider D.W. Distinguishing reconfiguration and compound-cue retrieval in task switching. Psychologica Belgica 2010, 50:413-433.
21. Longman C.S., Lavric A., Munteanu C., Monsell S. Attentional inertia and delayed orienting of spatial attention in task-switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2014, 40:1580-1602.
22. Masson M.E.J., Loftus G.R. Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 2003, 57:203-220.
23. Mayr U., Keele S.W. Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2000, 129:4-26.
24. Mayr U., Kliegl R. Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:362-372.
25. Meiran N. Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1996, 22:1423-1442.
26. Meiran N. Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research 2000, 63:234-249.
27. Meiran N., Chorev Z., Sapir A. Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 41:211-253.
28. Meiran N., Kessler Y. The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:137-157.
29. Monsell S., Mizon G.A. Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:493-516.
30. Monsell S., Sumner P., Waters H. Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Memory & Cognition 2003, 31:327-342.
31. Nosofsky R.M., Palmeri T.J. An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review 1997, 104:266-300.
32. Perry C., Ziegler J.C., Zorzi M. Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+model of reading aloud. Psychological Review 2007, 114:273-315.
33. Reisenauer R., Dreisbach G. The impact of task rules on distracter processing: Automatic categorization of irrelevant stimuli. Psychological Research 2013, 77:128-138.
34. Schneider D.W. Isolating a mediated route for response congruency effects in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2014, (in press), http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000049.
35. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. Modeling task switching without switching tasks: A short-term priming account of explicitly cued performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2005, 134:343-367.
36. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13:145-151.
37. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. Selecting a response in task switching: Testing a model of compound cue retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009, 35:122-136.
38. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. The target of task switching. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 2010, 64:129-133.
39. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. Task-switching performance with 1:1 and 2:1 cue-task mappings: Not so different after all. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2011, 37:405-415.
40. Schneider D.W., Logan G.D. Modelling response selection in task switching: Testing the contingent encoding assumption. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2014, 67:1074-1095.
41. Shiffrin R.M. Modeling memory and perception. Cognitive Science 2003, 27:341-378.
42. Sohn M.-H., Anderson J.R. Task preparation and task repetition: Two-component model of task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2001, 130:764-778.
43. Sternberg S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica 1969, 30:276-315.
44. Sudevan P., Taylor D.A. The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1987, 13:89-103.
45. Vandierendonck A., Liefooghe B., Verbruggen F. Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136:601-626.
46. Waszak F., Pfister R., Kiesel A. Top-down versus bottom-up: When instructions overcome automatic retrieval. Psychological Research 2013, 77:611-617.
47. Wendt M., Kiesel A. The impact of stimulus-specific practice and task instructions on response congruency effects between tasks. Psychological Research 2008, 72:425-432.
48. Yamaguchi M., Proctor R.W. Automaticity without extensive training: The role of memory retrieval in implementation of task-defined rules. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18:347-354.
49. Yamaguchi M., Proctor R.W. Multidimensional vector model of stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Review 2012, 119:272-303.