Literature DB >> 16610272

Selective stopping in task switching: The role of response selection and response execution.

Frederick Verbruggen1, Baptist Liefooghe, André Vandierendonck.   

Abstract

Recently, several studies stressed the role of response selection in cued task switching. The present study tried to investigate directly the hypothesis that no switch cost can be found when there was no response selection. In two experiments, we combined a cued task switching paradigm with the selective stopping paradigm. Results of the experiments demonstrated that a switch cost was found when participants selected a response, even without response execution. Alternatively, when the response was inhibited without the need of response selection, no switch cost was found. These results provide direct evidence for the distinct role of response selection in cued task switching and suggest that response execution is not a necessary factor to obtain a switch cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16610272     DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.48

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Psychol        ISSN: 1618-3169


  10 in total

1.  Control by action representation and input selection (CARIS): a theoretical framework for task switching.

Authors:  Nachshon Meiran; Yoav Kessler; Esther Adi-Japha
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-03-19

Review 2.  The role of inhibition in task switching: a review.

Authors:  Iring Koch; Miriam Gade; Stefanie Schuch; Andrea M Philipp
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-02

3.  Instruction effects in task switching.

Authors:  Iring Koch
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2008-04

4.  Covert judgements are sufficient to trigger subsequent task-switching costs.

Authors:  Rachel Swainson; Douglas Martin
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-08-12

5.  Selective stopping? Maybe not.

Authors:  Patrick G Bissett; Gordon D Logan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2013-03-11

6.  The neural basis of cognitive control: response selection and inhibition.

Authors:  Vina M Goghari; Angus W MacDonald
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 2.310

7.  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

8.  An architecturally constrained model of random number generation and its application to modeling the effect of generation rate.

Authors:  Nicholas J Sexton; Richard P Cooper
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-07-01

9.  No evidence for shared representations of task sets in joint task switching.

Authors:  Motonori Yamaguchi; Helen J Wall; Bernhard Hommel
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-10-15

10.  The effect of performing versus preparing a task on the subsequent switch cost.

Authors:  Rachel Swainson; Laura Prosser; Kostadin Karavasilev; Aleksandra Romanczuk
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2019-10-17
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.