Proactive control of irrelevant task rules during cued task switching

Psychological Research

Volumn 80, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 860-876

  Bugg, Julie M ^a   Braver, Todd S ^a  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOTIVATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; TASK PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ATTENTION; CUES; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTIVATION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84937844861     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-015-0686-5     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Switching intentional set: exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance, XV (pp. 421–452). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
2. Askren, M. K. A. (2010). You can’t have it both ways: An examination of congruency effects in task switching. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
3. Bakeman, R. (2005). Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 379–384.
4. Blais, C., & Bunge, S. (2010). Behavioral and neural evidence for item-specific performance monitoring. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2758–2767.
5. Blais, C., Harris, M. B., Guerrero, J. V., & Bunge, S. A. (2012). Rethinking the role of automaticity in cognitive control. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 268–276.
6. Blais, C., Robidoux, S., Risko, E. F., & Besner, D. (2007). Item-specific adaptation and the conflict monitoring hypothesis: a computational model. Psychological Review, 114, 1076–1086.
7. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624–652.
8. Braver, T. S., Gray, J. R., & Burgess, G. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake, & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Braverman, A., & Meiran, N. (2015). Conflict control in task conflict and response conflict. Psychological Research, 79, 238–248.
10. Bugg, J. M. (2012). Dissociating levels of cognitive control: the case of Stroop interference. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 302–309. doi:10.1177/0963721412453586.
11. Bugg, J. M. (2014). Conflict-triggered top-down control: default mode, last resort, or no such thing? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 567–587. doi:10.1037/a0035032.
12. Bugg, J. M., & Chanani, S. (2011). List-wide control is not entirely elusive: evidence from picture-word Stroop. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18, 930–936. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0112-y.
13. Bugg, J. M., & Crump, M. J. C. (2012). In support of a distinction between voluntary and stimulus-driven control: a review of the literature on proportion congruent effects. Frontiers in Psychology: Cognition, 3, 1–16. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00367.
14. Bugg, J. M., Diede, N. T., Cohen-Shikora, E. R., & Szelmecy, D. (2015). Expectations and experience: dissociable bases for cognitive control? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. doi:10.1037/xlm0000106.
15. Bugg, J. M., & Hutchison, K. A. (2013). Converging evidence for control of color-word Stroop interference at the item level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 433–449. doi:10.1037/a0029145.
16. Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Chanani, S. (2011a). Why it is too early to lose control in accounts of item-specific proportion congruency effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 844–859. doi:10.1037/a0019957.
17. Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Toth, J. (2008). Multiple levels of control in the Stroop task. Memory and Cognition, 36, 1484–1494. doi:10.3758/MC.36.8.1484.
18. Bugg, J. M., McDaniel, M. A., Scullin, M. K., & Braver, T. S. (2011b). Revealing list-level control in the Stroop task by uncovering its benefits and a cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1595–1606. doi:10.1037/a0024670.
19. Chiew, K. S., & Braver, T. S. (2013). Temporal dynamics of motivation-cognitive control interactions revealed by high-resolution pupillometry. Frontiers in Psychology,. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00015.
20. De Jong, R. (2000). An intention–activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 357–376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. De Pisapia, N., & Braver, T. S. (2006). A model of dual control mechanisms through anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex interactions. Neurocomputing, 69, 1322–1326.
22. Dishon-Berkovits, M., & Algom, D. (2000). The Stroop effect: It is not the robust phenomenon that you have thought it to be. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1437–1449.
23. Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 380–390.
24. Fagot, C. (1994). Chronometric investigations of task switching. Unpublished Dissertation, University of California-San Diego, San Diego, CA.
25. Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2011). To be or not to be…included in an event file: integration and retrieval of distractors in stimulus-response episodes is influenced by perceptual grouping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1209–1227.
26. Goschke, T. (2000). Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: control of cognitive processes (pp. 331–355). Cambridge: MIT Press.
27. Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation and responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480–506.
28. Heitz, R. P. (2014). The speed-accuracy tradeoff: history, physiology, methodology, and behavior. Frontiers in Neuroscience,. doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00150.
29. Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261–268.
30. Hutchison, K. A. (2011). The interactive effects of listwide control, item-based control, and working memory capacity on Stroop performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 851–860.
31. Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and switch. Archives of Psychology, Whole No. 89.
32. Jimura, K., & Braver, T. S. (2010). Age-related shifts in brain activity dynamics during task switching. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 1420–1431. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp206.
33. Jimura, K., Locke, H. S., & Braver, T. S. (2010). Prefontal cortex mediation of cognitive enhancement in rewarding motivational contexts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 8871–8876.
34. Kessler, Y., & Meiran, N. (2010). 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, 74, 388–399.
35. 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.
36. Kiesel, A., Wendt, M., & Peters, A. (2007). Task switching: on the origins of response congruency effects. Psychological Research, 71, 117–125.
37. Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 1–4.
38. Lindsay, D. S., & Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Stroop process dissociations: the relationship between facilitation and interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 219–234.
39. Logan, G. D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: theory and data. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 523–553.
40. Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop –like task. Memory and Cognition, 7, 166–174.
41. Logan, G. D., Zbrodoff, N. J., & Williamson, J. (1984). Strategies in the color-word Stroop task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 135–138.
42. Lowe, D., & Mitterer, J. O. (1982). Selective and divided attention in a Stroop task. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 36, 684–700.
43. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163–203.
44. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1124–1140.
45. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.
46. Meiran, N. (2000). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234–249.
47. Meiran, N. (2005). Task rule congruency and Simon-like effects in switching between spatial tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1023–1041.
48. Meiran, N., Hsieh, S., & Dimov, E. (2010). Resolving task rule incongruence during task switching by competitor rule suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 992–1002.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Melara, R. D., & Algom, D. (2003). Driven by information: a tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review, 110, 422–471.
52. Monsell, S., & Mizon, G. A. (2006). Can the task cueing paradigm measure an “endogenous” task set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 493–516.
53. Monsell, S., Sumner, P., & Waters, H. (2003). Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Memory and Cognition, 31, 327–342.
54. Nieuwenhuis, S., & Monsell, S. (2002). Residual costs in task switching: testing the failure-to- engage hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 86–92.
55. Olejnik, S., & Algina, J. (2003). Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychological Methods, 8, 434–447.
56. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.
57. Rubin, O., & Meiran, N. (2005). On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1477–1491.
58. Ruge, H., Jamadar, S., Zimmerman, U., & Karayanidis, F. (2013). The many faces of preparatory control in task switching: reviewing a decade of fMRI research. Human Brain Mapping, 34, 12–35.
59. Schmidt, J. R. (2013). Temporal learning and list-level proportion congruency: conflict adaptation or learning when to respond? PLoS One,. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.008232012.
60. Schmidt, J. R. (2014). List-level transfer effects in temporal learning: further complications for the list-level proportion congruent effect. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26, 373–385.
61. Schmidt, J. R., & Besner, D. (2008). The Stroop effect: Why proportion congruence has nothing to do with congruency and everything to do with contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 514–523.
62. Schneider, D. W. (2014). Isolating a mediated route for response congruency effects in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/xlm0000049.
63. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Modeling task switching without switching tasks: a short-term priming account of explicitly cued performance. Psychology: General, 134, 343––367.
64. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2010). The target of task switching. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 129–133.
65. Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 92–105.
66. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
67. Sudevan, P., & Taylor, D. A. (1987). The cueing and priming of cognitive operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 89–103.
68. Toth, J. P., Levine, B., Stuss, D. T., Oh, A., Winocur, G., & Meiran, N. (1995). Dissociation of processes underlying spatial SR compatibility: evidence for the independent influence of what and where. Consciousness and Cognition, 4(4), 483–501.
69. Tzelgov, J. (1997). Specifying the relations between automaticity and consciousness: a theoretical note. Consciousness and Cognition, 6, 441–451.
70. Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601–626.
71. Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2008). Hebbian learning of cognitive control: dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. Psychological Review, 115, 518–525.
72. Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long term priming: role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413.
73. Waszak, F., Pfister, R., & Kiesel, A. (2013). Top-down versus bottom-up: when instructions overcome automatic retrieval. Psychological Research, 77, 611–617.
74. 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.
75. Wendt, M., & Luna-Rodriguez, A. (2009). Conflict-frequency affects flanker-interference. Experimental Psychology, 56, 206–217.
76. West, R., & Baylis, G. C. (1998). Effect of increased response dominance and contextual disintegration on the Stroop interference effect in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 13, 206–217.
77. Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2011). Automaticity without extensive training: the role of memory retrieval in implementation of task-defined rules. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 347–354.