Creatures of habit (and control): A multi-level learning perspective on the modulation of congruency effects

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 5, Issue NOV, 2014, Pages

  Egner, Tobias ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Cognitive control; Conflict adaptation; Congruency sequence effect; Contingency learning; Feature integration; Memory; Proportion congruent effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923333452     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01247     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Aarts, E., and Roelofs, A. (2011). Attentional control in anterior cingulate cortex based on probabilistic cueing. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 716-727. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21435
2. Akcay, C., and Hazeltine, E. (2007). Conflict monitoring and feature overlap: two sources of sequential modulations. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 14, 742-748. doi: 10.3758/BF03196831
3. Akcay, C., and Hazeltine, E. (2008). Conflict adaptation depends on task structure. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 34, 958-973. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.958
4. Akcay, C., and Hazeltine, E. (2011). Domain-specific conflict adaptation without feature repetitions. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 505-511. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0084-y
5. Behrens, T. E., Woolrich, M. W., Walton, M. E., and Rushworth, M. F. (2007). Learning the value of information in an uncertain world. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 1214-1221. doi: 10.1038/nn1954
6. Bissett, P. G., and Logan, G. D. (2012). Post-stop-signal adjustments: inhibition improves subsequent inhibition. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 38, 955-966. doi: 10.1037/a0026778
7. Blais, C., Robidoux, S., Risko, E. F., and Besner, D. (2007). Item-specific adaptation and the conflict-monitoring hypothesis: a computational model. Psychol. Rev. 114, 1076-1086. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.1076
8. Blais, C., and Verguts, T. (2012). Increasing set size breaks down sequential congruency: evidence for an associative locus of cognitive control. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 141, 133-139. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.07.009
9. Blais, C. S., and Bunge, S. (2010). Behavioral and neural evidence for item-specific performance monitoring. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 2758-2767. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21365
10. Botvinick, M. M. (2007). Conflict monitoring and decision making: reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 7, 356-366. doi: 10.3758/CABN.7.4.356
11. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., and Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychol. Rev. 108, 624-652. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624
12. Boy, F., Husain, M., and Sumner, P. (2010). Unconscious inhibition separates two forms of cognitive control. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 11134-11139. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1001925107
13. Braem, S., Abrahamse, E. L., Duthoo, W., and Notebaert, W. (2014). What determines the specificity of conflict adaptation? A review, critical analysis, and proposed synthesis. Front. Psychol. 5:1134. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01134
14. Braver, T. S., and Barch, D. M. (2002). A theory of cognitive control, aging cognition, and neuromodulation. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 26, 809-817. doi: 10.1016/S0149-7634(02)00067-2
15. Bugg, J. M. (2014). Conflict-triggered top-down control: default mode, last resort, or no such thing? J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 40, 567-587. doi: 10.1037/a0035032
16. Bugg, J. M., and Chanani, S. (2011). List-wide control is not entirely elusive: evidence from picture-word Stroop. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 930-936. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0112-y
17. Bugg, J. M., and Crump, M. J. (2012). In support of a distinction between voluntary and stimulus-driven control: a review of the literature on proportion congruent effects. Front. Psychol. 3:367. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00367
18. Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., and Chanani, S. (2011). Why it is too early to lose control in accounts of item-specific proportion congruency effects. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 37, 844-859. doi: 10.1037/a0019957
19. Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., and Toth, J. (2008). Multiple levels of control in the Stroop task. Mem. Cogn. 36, 1484-1494. doi: 10.3758/MC.36.8.1484
20. Cheadle, S., Wyart, V., Tsetsos, K., Myers, N., de Gardelle, V., Herce Castanon, S., et al. (2014). Adaptive gain control during human perceptual choice. Neuron 81, 1429-1441. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.01.020
21. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behav. Brain Sci. 36, 181-204. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X12000477
22. Crump, M. J., Gong, Z., and Milliken, B. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: location as a contextual cue. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 13, 316-321. doi: 10.3758/BF03193850
23. Crump, M. J., and Logan, G. D. (2010). Contextual control over task-set retrieval. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 2047-2053. doi: 10.3758/BF03196681
24. Crump, M. J., and Milliken, B. (2009). The flexibility of context-specific control: evidence for context-driven generalization of item-specific control settings. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. (Hove) 62, 1523-1532. doi: 10.1080/17470210902752096
25. Dong, D. W., and Atick, J. J. (1995). Statistics of natural time-varying images. Network 6, 345-358. doi: 10.1088/0954-898X/6/3/003
26. Dreisbach, G., and Fischer, R. (2012). Conflicts as aversive signals. Brain Cogn. 78, 94-98. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2011.12.003
27. Duthoo, W., Abrahamse, E., Braem, S., Boehler, C. N., and Notebaert, W. (2014a). The heterogeneous world of congruency sequence effects: an update. Front. Psychol. 5:1001. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01001
28. Duthoo, W., Abrahamse, E. L., Braem, S., and Notebaert, W. (2014b). Going, going, gone? Proactive control prevents the congruency sequence effect from rapid decay. Psychol. Res. 78, 483-493. doi: 10.1007/s00426-013-0498-4
29. Duthoo, W., De Baene, W., Wuhr, P., and Notebaert, W. (2012). When predictions take control: the effect of task predictions on task switching performance. Front. Psychol. 3:282. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00282
30. Duthoo, W., and Notebaert, W. (2012). Conflict adaptation: it is not what you expect. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. (Hove) 65, 1993-2007. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.676655
31. Duthoo, W., Wuhr, P., and Notebaert, W. (2013). The hot-hand fallacy in cognitive control: repetition expectancy modulates the congruency sequence effect. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20, 798-805. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0390-7
32. Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 7, 380-390. doi: 10.3758/CABN.7.4.380
33. Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 374-380. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.001
34. Egner, T., Delano, M., and Hirsch, J. (2007). Separate conflict-specific cognitive control mechanisms in the human brain. Neuroimage 35, 940-948. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.061
35. Egner, T., Ely, S., and Grinband, J. (2010). Going, going, gone: characterizing the time-course of congruency sequence effects. Front. Psychol. 1:154. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00154
36. Egner, T., Etkin, A., Gale, S., and Hirsch, J. (2008). Dissociable neural systems resolve conflict from emotional versus nonemotional distracters. Cereb. Cortex 18, 1475-1484. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhm179
37. Egner, T., and Hirsch, J. (2005). Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1784-1790. doi: 10.1038/nn1594
38. Fischer, J., and Whitney, D. (2014). Serial dependence in visual perception. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 738-743. doi: 10.1038/nn.3689
39. Freitas, A. L., and Clark, S. L. (2014). Generality and specificity in cognitive control: conflict adaptation within and across selective-attention tasks but not across selective-attention and Simon tasks. Psychol. Res. doi: 10.1007/s00426-014-0540-1 [Epub ahead of print].
40. Funes, M. J., Lupianez, J., and Humphreys, G. (2010). Analyzing the generality of conflict adaptation effects. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 36, 147-161. doi: 10.1037/a0017598
41. Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., and Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation of responses. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 121, 480-506. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.480
42. Hawkins, J., and Blakeslee, S. (2004). On Intelligence. New York: Times Books.
43. Hazeltine, E., Lightman, E., Schwarb, H., and Schumacher, E. H. (2011). The boundaries of sequential modulations: evidence for set-level control. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 37, 1898-1914. doi: 10.1037/a0024662
44. Heinemann, A., Kunde, W., and Kiesel, A. (2009). Context-specific prime-congruency effects: on the role of conscious stimulus representations for cognitive control. Conscious. Cogn. 18, 966-976. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2009.08.009
45. Hengstler, M., Holland, R. W., van Steenbergen, H., and van Knippenberg, A. (2014). The influence of approach-avoidance motivational orientation on conflict adaptation. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 14, 548-560. doi: 10.3758/s13415-014-0295-6
46. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Vis. Cogn. 5, 183-216. doi: 10.1080/713756773
47. Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 494-500. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.007
48. Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., and Vu, K. P. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychol. Res. 68, 1-17. doi: 10.1007/s00426-003-0132-y
49. Jacoby, L. L., Lindsay, D. S., and Hessels, S. (2003). Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 10, 638-644. doi: 10.3758/BF03196526
50. Jiang, J., and Egner, T. (2014). Using neural pattern classifiers to quantify the modularity of conflict-control mechanisms in the human brain. Cereb. Cortex 24, 1793-1805. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht029
51. Jiang, J., Heller, K., and Egner, T. (2014). Bayesian modeling of flexible cognitive control. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.06.001 [Epub ahead of print].
52. Jimenez, L., and Mendez, A. (2013). It is not what you expect: dissociating conflict adaptation from expectancies in a Stroop task. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 39, 271-284. doi: 10.1037/a0027734
53. Jimenez, L., and Mendez, A. (2014). Even with time, conflict adaptation is not made of expectancies. Front. Psychol. 5:1042. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01042
54. Kensinger, E. A., Siri, S., Cappa, S. F., and Corkin, S. (2003). Role of the anterior temporal lobe in repetition and semantic priming: evidence from a patient with a category-specific deficit. Neuropsychologia 41, 71-84. doi: 10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00131-8
55. Kim, C., Chung, C., and Kim, J. (2012). Conflict adjustment through domain-specific multiple cognitive control mechanisms. Brain Res. 1444, 55-64. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.01.023
56. Kim, S., and Cho, Y. S. (2014). Congruency sequence effect without feature integration and contingency learning. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 149, 60-68. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.03.004
57. King, J. A., Korb, F. M., and Egner, T. (2012). Priming of control: implicit contextual cuing of top-down attentional set. J. Neurosci. 32, 8192-8200. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0934-12.2012
58. Koechlin, E., Ody, C., and Kouneiher, F. (2003). The architecture of cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Science 302, 1181-1185. doi: 10.1126/science.1088545
59. Koechlin, E., and Summerfield, C. (2007). An information theoretical approach to prefrontal executive function. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 229-235. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.04.005
60. Kool, W., McGuire, J. T., Rosen, Z. B., and Botvinick, M. M. (2010). Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 139, 665-682. doi: 10.1037/a0020198
61. Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: the case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli. Psychol. Res. 56, 130-135. doi: 10.1007/BF00419699
62. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., and Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy. Psychol. Rev. 97, 253-270. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.2.253
63. Krebs, R. M., Boehler, C. N., De Belder, M., and Egner, T. (2013). Neural conflict-control mechanisms improve memory for target stimuli. Cereb. Cortex. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bht283 [Epub ahead of print].
64. Kühn, S., Keizer, A. W., Colzato, L. S., Rombouts, S. A., and Hommel, B. (2011). The neural underpinnings of event-file management: evidence for stimulus-induced activation of and competition among stimulus-response bindings. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 896-904. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2010.21485
65. Kunde, W., Augst, S., and Kleinsorge, T. (2012). Adaptation to (non)valent task disturbance. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 12, 644-660. doi: 10.3758/s13415-012-0116-8
66. Kunde, W., and Wuhr, P. (2006). Sequential modulations of correspondence effects across spatial dimensions and tasks. Mem. Cogn. 34, 356-367. doi: 10.3758/BF03193413
67. Lee, J., and Cho, Y. S. (2013). Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: evidence for dimension-specific modulation. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 144, 617-627. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.09.013
68. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychol. Rev. 95, 492-527. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492
69. Logan, G. D., and Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task. Mem. Cogn. 7, 166-174. doi: 10.3758/BF03197535
70. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychol. Bull. 109, 163-203. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163
71. Mayr, U., Awh, E., and Laurey, P. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control. Nat. Neurosci. 6, 450-452. doi: 10.1038/nn1051
72. Mayr, U., Kuhns, D., and Hubbard, J. (2014). Long-term memory and the control of attentional control. Cogn. Psychol. 72, 1-26. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.02.001
73. Melara, R. D., and Algom, D. (2003). Driven by information: a tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychol. Rev. 110, 422-471. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.422
74. Miller, E. K., and Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 167-202. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
75. Mordkoff, J. T. (2012). Observation: three reasons to avoid having half of the trials be congruent in a four-alternative forced-choice experiment on sequential modulation. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 19, 750-757. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0257-3
76. Neill, W. T. (1997). Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 23, 1291-1305. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.23.6.1291
77. Nieuwenhuis, S., Stins, J. F., Posthuma, D., Polderman, T. J. C., Boomsma, D. I., and de Geus, E. J. (2006). Accounting for sequential effects in the flanker task: conflict adaptation or associative priming? Mem. Cogn. 34, 1260-1272. doi: 10.3758/BF03193270
78. Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verbruggen, F., and Liefooghe, B. (2006). Top-down and bottom-up sequential modulations of congruency effects. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 13, 112-117. doi: 10.3758/BF03193821
79. Notebaert, W., and Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition 106, 1071-1080. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.011
80. Pashler, H., and Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 2. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded choice tasks. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 17, 33-48. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.17.1.33
81. Puccioni, O., and Vallesi, A. (2012). Sequential congruency effects: disentangling priming and conflict adaptation. Psychol. Res. 76, 591-600. doi: 10.1007/s00426-011-0360-5
82. Remington, R. J. (1969). Analysis of sequential effects in choice reaction times. J. Exp. Psychol. 82, 250-257. doi: 10.1037/h0028122
83. Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: activation and suppression in conflict tasks. Psychol. Res. 66, 312-323. doi: 10.1007/s00426-002-0104-7
84. Rosner, T. M., D'Angelo, M. C., MacLellan, E., and Milliken, B. (2014). Selective attention and recognition: effects of congruency on episodic learning. Psychol. Res. doi: 10.1007/s00426-014-0572-6 [Epub ahead of print].
85. Schlaghecken, F., Refaat, M., and Maylor, E. A. (2011). Multiple systems for cognitive control: evidence from a hybrid prime-Simon task. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 37, 1542-1553. doi: 10.1037/a0024327
86. Schmidt, J. R. (2013). Questioning conflict adaptation: proportion congruent and Gratton effects reconsidered. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20, 615-630. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0373-0
87. Schmidt, J. R., and De Houwer, J. (2011). Now you see it, now you don't: controlling for contingencies and stimulus repetitions eliminates the Gratton effect. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 138, 176-186. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.06.002
88. Schmidt, J. R., and Weissman, D. H. (2014). Congruency sequence effects without feature integration or contingency learning confounds. PLoS ONE 9:e102337. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102337
89. Shin, Y. K., Proctor, R. W., and Capaldi, E. J. (2010). A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychol. Bull. 136, 943-974. doi: 10.1037/a0020541
90. Simon, J. R., and Berbaum, K. (1990). Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 73, 159-170. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(90)90077-S
91. Spape, M. M., and Hommel, B. (2008). He said, she said: episodic retrieval induces conflict adaptation in an auditory Stroop task. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 15, 1117-1121. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.6.1117
92. Squire, L. R. (1992). Memory and the hippocampus: a synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans. Psychol. Rev. 99, 195-231. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.99.2.195
93. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J. Exp. Psychol. 18, 643-662. doi: 10.1037/h0054651
94. Sturmer, B., and Leuthold, H. (2003). Control over response priming in visuomotor processing: a lateralized event-related potential study. Exp. Brain Res. 153, 35-44. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1579-1
95. Sturmer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schroter, H., and Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 28, 1345-1363. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.28.6.1345
96. Sutton, R., and Barto, A. (1998). Reinforcement Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
97. Torres-Quesada, M., Korb, F. M., Funes, M. J., Lupianez, J., and Egner, T. (2014). Comparing neural substrates of emotional vs. non-emotional conflict modulation by global control context. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8:66. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00066
98. Treisman, A. M., and Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cogn. Psychol. 12, 97-136. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5
99. Ullsperger, M., Bylsma, L. M., and Botvinick, M. M. (2005). The conflict adaptation effect: it's not just priming. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 5, 467-472. doi: 10.3758/CABN.5.4.467
100. van den Wildenberg, W. P., Ridderinkhof, K. R., and Wylie, S. A. (2012). Once bitten, twice shy: on the transient nature of congruency sequence effects. Front. Psychol. 3:264. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00264
101. van den Wildenberg, W. P., Wylie, S. A., Forstmann, B. U., Burle, B., Hasbroucq, T., and Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2010). To head or to heed? Beyond the surface of selective action inhibition: a review. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 4:222. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00222
102. Verguts, T., and Notebaert, W. (2008). Hebbian learning of cognitive control: dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. Psychol. Rev. 115, 518-525. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.518
103. Verguts, T., and Notebaert, W. (2009). Adaptation by binding: a learning account of cognitive control. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 252-257. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.02.007
104. Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., and Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 40, 2022-2037. doi: 10.1037/a0037454
105. Wendt, M., Kluwe, R. H., and Peters, A. (2006). Sequential modulations of interference evoked by processing task-irrelevant stimulus features. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32, 644-667. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.644