The effect of practice on n-2 repetition costs in set switching

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 154, Issue , 2015, Pages 14-25

  Grange, James A ^a   Juvina, Ion ^b  

^a KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

ACT R; Computational model; Inhibition; Task switching

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; MEMORY; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE; THEORETICAL MODEL; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; MEMORY; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84911871480     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (39)

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, University Press, Oxford.
3. Balota D.A., Yap M.J. Moving beyond the mean in studies of mental chronometry: The power of response time distributional analyses. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2011, 20:160-166.
4. Berryhill M.E., Hughes H.C. On the minimization of task switch costs following long-term training. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2009, 71:503-514.
5. Druey M.D. Response-repetition costs in choice-rt tasks: Biased expectancies or response inhibition?. Acta Psychologica 2014, 145:21-32.
6. Gade M., Koch I. Linking inhibition to activation in the control of task sequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:530-534.
7. Gade M., Koch I. Cue type affects preparatory influences on task inhibition. Acta Psychologica 2014, 148:12-18.
8. Grange J.A. Control of cognitive processes in task switching 2010, (PhD thesis), Bangor University, UK.
9. Grange J.A., Houghton G. Temporal cue-target overlap is not essential for backward inhibition in task switching. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2009, 62:2069-2080.
10. Grange J.A., Houghton G. Cue-switch costs in task-switching: Cue-priming or control processes?. Psychological Research 2010, 74:481-490.
11. Grange J.A., Houghton G. Heightened conflict in cue-target translation increases backward inhibition in set switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2010, 36:1003-1009.
12. Grange J.A., Houghton G. Task preparation and task inhibition: A comment on Koch, Gade, Schuch, & Philipp (2010). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18:211-216.
13. Task switching and cognitive control 2014, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. J.A. Grange, G. Houghton (Eds.).
14. 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.
15. Grange J.A., Lody A., Bratt S. Cost-benefit and distributional analyses of accessory stimuli. Psychological Research 2012, 76:626-633.
16. Houghton G., Pritchard R., Grange J.A. The role of cue-target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009, 35:466-476.
17. Houghton G., Tipper S. A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. Inhibitory processes of attention, memory and language 1994, 53-112. Academic Press, Florida. D. Dagenbach, T. Carr (Eds.).
18. Juvina I., Taatgen N. A repetition-suppression account of between-trial effects in a modified Stroop-task. Acta Psychologica 2009, 131:72-84.
19. Kiesel A., Steinhauser M., Wendt M., Falkstein M., Jost K., Philipp A., et al. Control and interference in task switching-A review. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136:849-874.
20. 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.
21. Lebiere C., Best B.J. Balancing long-term reinforcement and short-term inhibition. Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2009, Cognitive Science Society, Austin.
22. Loftus G.R., Masson M.E.J. Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1994, 1:476-490.
23. Logan G.D. Toward an instance theory of automization. Psychological Review 1988, 95:492-527.
24. Logan G.D., Gordon R.D. Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review 2001, 108:393-434.
25. Massidda D. retimes: Reaction Time Analysis. R package version 0.1-2 2013.
26. Mayr U., Keele S.W. Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2000, 129:4-26.
27. Philipp A.M., Jolicoeur P., Falkenstein M., Koch I. Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2007, 33:1062-1075.
28. Philipp A.M., Koch I. Task inhibition and task repetition in task switching. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 2006, 18:624-639.
29. R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2013, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
30. Scheil J., Kleinsorge T. N-2 repetition costs depend on preparation in trials n-1 and n-2. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2014, 40:865-872.
31. 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.
32. Schuch S., Koch I. The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2003, 29:92-105.
33. Sdoia S., Ferlazzo F. Stimulus-related inhibition of task set during task switching. Experimental Psychology 2008, 55:322-327.
34. Sireteanu R., Rettenbach R. Perceptual learning in visual search: Fast, enduring, but non-specific. Vision Research 1995, 35:2037-2043.
35. Stoet G., Snyder L.H. Extensive practice does not eliminate human switch costs. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 2007, 7:192-197.
36. Strobach T., Liepelt R., Schubert T., Kiesel A. Task switching: Effects of practice on switch and mixing costs. Psychological Research 2012, 76:74-83.
37. Thomson R., Lebiere C. Constraining Bayesian inference with cognitive architectures: An updated associative learning mechanism in ACT-R. Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci '13), Berlin, Germany 2013.
38. Vandierendonck A., Liefooghe B., Verbruggen F. Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136:601-626.
39. Whitmer A.J., Banich M.T. Inhibition versus switching deficits in different forms of rumination. Psychological Science 2007, 18:546-553.