The Role of Response Selection for Inhibition of Task Sets in Task Shifting

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 92-105

  Schuch, Stefanie ^a   Koch, Iring ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; TIME;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; REACTION TIME; SET (PSYCHOLOGY); TIME FACTORS;

EID: 85047694161     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.92     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Allport, D. A. (1987). Selection for action: Some behavioral and neurophysiological considerations of attention and action. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Perspectives on perception and action (pp. 395-419). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Allport, D. A., & Wylie, G. (1998). Task-switching: Positive and negative priming of task-set. In G. W. Humphreys, J. Duncan, & A. M. Treisman (Eds.), Attention, space and action: Studies in cognitive neuroscience (pp. 273-296). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
4. Allport, D. A., & Wylie, G. (2000). Task-switching, stimulus-response bindings, and negative priming. In S. Monsell & J. S. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 35-70). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Arbuthnott, K., & Frank, J. (2000). Executive control in set switching: Residual switch cost and task-set inhibition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 33-41.
6. De Jong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 357-376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Fagot, C. (1994). Chronometric investigations of task switching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
8. 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. 333-355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Hoffmann, J., Kiesel, A., & Sebald, A. (in press). Task switches under go/no-go conditions and the decomposition of switch costs. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology.
10. Jolicœur, P., Tombu, M., Oriet, C., & Stevanovski, B. (2002). From perception to action: Making the connection. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 558-586). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
11. Kluwe, R. H. (1997). Intentionale Steuerung kognitiver Prozesse [Intentional control of cognitive processes]. Kognitionswissenschaft, 6, 53-69.
12. Koch, I. (2001). Automatic and intentional activation of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1474-1486.
13. Koch, I. (in press). The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.
14. Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2001). Cue-based and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Manuscript submitted for publication.
15. Kohonen, T. (1984). Self-organization and associative memory. New York: Springer.
16. Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A user's guide to the stop-signal paradigm. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory and language (pp. 214-249). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17. MacKay, D. G. (1987). The organization of perception and action. New York: Springer.
18. Mayr, U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology and Aging, 16, 96-109.
19. Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4-26.
20. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1124-1140.
21. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423-1442.
22. Meiran, N. (2000a). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
23. Meiran, N. (2000b). The reconfiguration of the stimulus task-set and the response task-set during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 377-400). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211-253.
25. Monsell, S. (1996). Control of mental processes. In V. Bruce (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: Tutorial essays in cognition (pp. 93148). Hove, England: Psychology Press.
26. Neumann, O. (1990). Visual attention and action. In O. Neumann & W. Prinz (Eds.), Relationships between perception and action: Current approaches (pp. 227-267). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
27. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
28. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
29. Rubinstein, J., Meyer, E. D., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 763-797.
30. Sohn, M.-H., & Carlson, R. A. (2000). Effects of repetition and foreknowledge in task-set reconfiguration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1445-1460.
31. Sudevan, P., & Taylor, D. A. (1987). The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 89-103.
32. Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2002). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic S-R bindings in task shift costs. Manuscript submitted for publication.