Literature DB >> 15260197

Preparation for a forthcoming task is sufficient to produce subsequent shift costs.

Thomas Kleinsorge1, Patrick D Gajewski.   

Abstract

Shifting from one task to another is associated with significant costs. Recently, it has been questioned whether the mere preparation for a forthcoming task, without the task's actually being executed, is sufficient to establish a new task set that results in shift costs when the execution of a task other than the prepared task is required. In a go/no-go study, it is shown that the mere preparation for a task is sufficient to produce shift costs, but only under conditions that encourage participants to engage in advance preparation for a precued task despite the possibility that the execution of this task will not always be required, because of occasional no-go trials. In addition, considerable reductions of shift costs after go trials could be observed under these conditions. When such a motivating context was not provided, only negligible shift costs were observed after a no-go trial, indicating that no task-set configuration had taken place without the need to perform the task. Furthermore, under these conditions, prolonging the preparation interval resulted in reaction time benefits that were similar for task shifts and repetitions, again indicating that no active task-set configuration took place.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15260197     DOI: 10.3758/bf03196574

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  9 in total

1.  Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching.

Authors:  J S Rubinstein; D E Meyer; J E Evans
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  Residual costs in task switching: testing the failure-to-engage hypothesis.

Authors:  Sander Nieuwenhuis; Stephen Monsell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-03

3.  Goal neglect and inhibitory limitations: dissociable causes of interference effects in conflict situations.

Authors:  R De Jong; E Berendsen; R Cools
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1999-04

4.  The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting.

Authors:  Stefanie Schuch; Iring Koch
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Task-switching and long-term priming: role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs.

Authors:  Florian Waszak; Bernhard Hommel; Alan Allport
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Effects of response selection on the task repetition benefit in task switching.

Authors:  Iring Koch; Andrea M Philipp
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-06

7.  Task sets under reconstruction: effects of partially incorrect precues.

Authors:  Thomas Kleinsorge; Patrick D Gajewski; Herbert Heuer
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2005-04

8.  Strategies and mechanisms in nonselective and selective inhibitory motor control.

Authors:  R De Jong; M G Coles; G D Logan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Component processes in task switching.

Authors:  N Meiran; Z Chorev; A Sapir
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.468

  9 in total
  8 in total

1.  Pending intentions: effects of prospective task encoding on the performance of another task.

Authors:  Thomas Kleinsorge; Patrick D Gajewski
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-04-26

2.  Response execution, selection, or activation: what is sufficient for response-related repetition effects under task shifting?

Authors:  Ronald Hübner; Michel D Druey
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-09-07

3.  Instruction-induced feature binding.

Authors:  Dorit Wenke; Robert Gaschler; Dieter Nattkemper
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-12-10

4.  Task-switching with antisaccades versus no-go trials: a comparison of inter-trial effects.

Authors:  Jason J S Barton; Mustafa Raoof; Omar Jameel; Dara S Manoach
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  No-go trials can modulate switch cost by interfering with effects of task preparation.

Authors:  Agatha Lenartowicz; Nick Yeung; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2010-05-16

6.  How Do Children Deal With Conflict? A Developmental Study of Sequential Conflict Modulation.

Authors:  Silvan F A Smulders; Eric L L Soetens; Maurits W van der Molen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-05-23

7.  No-go trials in task switching: effects on the task-set and task-space level.

Authors:  Juliane Scheil; Thomas Kleinsorge
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-07-31

8.  Strategic influences on implementing instructions for future actions.

Authors:  Dorit Wenke; Robert Gaschler; Dieter Nattkemper; Peter A Frensch
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2009-04-10
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.