Perceptual and conceptual priming of cue encoding in task switching

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 42, Issue 7, 2016, Pages 1112-1126

  Schneider, Darryl W ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cue encoding; Cue repetition; Memory; Priming; Task switching

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; REPETITION PRIMING; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CUES; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; REPETITION PRIMING; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 84954350220     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000232     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Arbuthnott, K. D., & Woodward, T. S. (2002). The influence of cue-task association and location on switch cost and alternating-switch cost. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 56, 18 -29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ h0087382
2. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). Episodic and semantic components of the compound-stimulus strategy in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Memory & Cognition, 32, 965-978. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/ BF03196874
3. Arrington, C. M., Logan, G. D., & Schneider, D. W. (2007). 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, 33, 484-502. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.484
4. Bertelson, P. (1965). Serial choice reaction-time as a function of response versus signal-and-response repetition. Nature, 206, 217-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/206217a0
5. Brass, M., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2004). Decomposing components of task preparation with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 609 - 620. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/ 089892904323057335
6. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.6.1345
7. Eichelman, W. H. (1970). Stimulus and response repetition effects for naming letters at two response-stimulus intervals. Perception & Psychophysics, 7, 94-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210140
8. Farell, B. (1985). Same-different judgments: A review of current controversies in perceptual comparisons. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 419-456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.98.3.419
9. Forrest, C. L. D., Monsell, S., & McLaren, I. P. L. (2014). Is performance in task-cuing experiments mediated by task set selection or associative compound retrieval? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1002-1024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ a0035981
10. Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Cue-task associations in task switching. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 762-769. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470210701268005
11. Grange, J. A., & Houghton, G. (2010). Cue-switch costs in task-switching: Cue priming or control processes? Psychological Research, 74, 481- 490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0270-y
12. Jost, K., De Baene, W., Koch, I., & Brass, M. (2013). A review of the role of cue processing in task switching. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 221, 5-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000125
13. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019842
14. Kiesel, A., Wendt, M., & Peters, A. (2007). Task switching: On the origin of response congruency effects. Psychological Research, 71, 117-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0004-8
15. Koch, I. (2003). The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 488- 492. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03196511
16. Koch, I., Prinz, W., & Allport, A. (2005). Involuntary retrieval in alphabetarithmetic tasks: Task-mixing and task-switching costs. Psychological Research, 69, 252-261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-004-0180-y
17. Kornblum, S. (1973). Sequential effects in choice reaction time: A tutorial review. In S. Kornblum (Ed.), Attention and performance IV (pp. 259- 288). New York, NY: Academic Press.
18. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.575
19. Logan, G. D., & Bundesen, C. (2004). Very clever homunculus: Compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 832- 840. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/ BF03196709
20. Logan, G. D., & Schneider, D. W. (2006a). Interpreting instructional cues in task switching procedures: The role of mediator retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 347- 363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.347
21. Logan, G. D., & Schneider, D. W. (2006b). Priming or executive control? Associative priming of cue encoding increases "switch costs" in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1250-1259. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193269
22. Logan, G. D., Schneider, D. W., & Bundesen, C. (2007). Still clever after all these years: Searching for the homunculus in explicitly cued task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 978-994. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.4.978
23. Los, S. A. (1996). On the origin of mixing costs: Exploring information processing in pure and mixed blocks of trials. Acta Psychologica, 94, 145-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(95)00050-X
24. Marí-Beffa, P., & Kirkham, A. (2014). The mixing cost as a measure of cognitive control. In J. A. Grange & G. Houghton (Eds.), Task switching and cognitive control (pp. 74-100). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.003.0004
25. Mayr, U. (2006). What matters in the cued task-switching paradigm: Tasks or cues? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 794-799. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193999
26. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1124-1140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.5.1124
27. 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. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0278-7393.29.3.362
28. Mayr, U., Kuhns, D., & Rieter, M. (2013). Eye movements reveal dynamics of task control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 489-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029353
29. McClelland, J. L. (1979). On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. Psychological Review, 86, 287-330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.4.287
30. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423-1442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1423
31. Meiran, N. (2014). The task-cuing paradigm: A user's guide. In J. A. Grange & G. Houghton (Eds.), Task switching and cognitive control (pp. 45-73). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.003.0003
32. Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2000.0736
33. 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. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.137
34. Miyake, A., Emerson, M. J., Padilla, F., & Ahn, J.-C. (2004). Inner speech as a retrieval aid for task goals: The effects of cue type and articulatory suppression in the random task cuing paradigm. Acta Psychologica, 115, 123-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.12.004
35. Monsell, S., & Mizon, G. A. (2006). Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 493-516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.493
36. Monsell, S., Sumner, P., & Waters, H. (2003). Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Memory & Cognition, 31, 327-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03194391
37. Nickerson, R. S. (1978). On the time it takes to tell things apart. In J. Requin (Ed.), Attention and performance VII (pp. 77-88). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.1.33
39. Posner, M. I. (1969). Abstraction and the process of recognition. In G. H. Bower & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 43-100). New York, NY: Academic Press.
40. Posner, M. I. (1970). On the relationship between letter names and superordinate categories. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 279-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335557043000221
41. Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Posner, M. I., Boies, S. J., Eichelman, W. H., & Taylor, R. L. (1969). Retention of visual and name codes of single letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0026947
43. Posner, M. I., & Mitchell, R. F. (1967). Chronometric analysis of classification. Psychological Review, 74, 392-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ h0024913
44. Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Proctor, R. W. (1981). A unified theory for matching-task phenomena. Psychological Review, 88, 291-326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033- 295X.88.4.291
46. Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1968). Repetition effects and signal classification strategies in serial choice-response tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 232-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 14640746808400157
47. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207
48. 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, and Cognition, 31, 1477-1491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1477
49. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.763
50. Schneider, D. W. (2015a). Attentional control of response selection in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 1315-1324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000091
51. Schneider, D. W. (2015b). Isolating a mediated route for response congruency effects in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 235-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000049
52. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Modeling task switching without switching tasks: A short-term priming account of explicitly cued performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 343-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.3.343
53. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2006). Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 145-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193826
54. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2007). Retrieving information from a hierarchical plan. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1076-1091. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278- 7393.33.6.1076
55. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2009). Selecting a response in task switching: Testing a model of compound cue retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 122- 136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013744
56. Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2011). 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, 37, 405-415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021967
57. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096- 3445.130.4.764
58. Sudevan, P., & Taylor, D. A. (1987). The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 89-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.13.1.89
59. Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601-626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019791