Literature DB >> 16724783

A critical test of the failure-to-engage theory of task switching.

Scott Brown1, Curtis Lehmann, Dane Poboka.   

Abstract

When people switch between two tasks, their performance on each is worse than when they perform that task in isolation. One theory of this "switch cost" is the failure-to-engage (FTE) theory, which posits that observed responses are a simple mixture of prepared and unprepared response strategies. The probability that participants use prepared processes can be manipulated experimentally (e.g., by changing preparation time). The FTE theory is a binary mixture model and therefore makes a strong prediction about the existence of fixed points in response time distributions. We found evidence contradicting this prediction, using data from 20 participants in a standard task-switching paradigm. In this article, we examine reasons for the failure of the FTE theory, and we demonstrate that a generalized version of FTE theory accommodates our data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16724783     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193827

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


  13 in total

Review 1.  How to fit a response time distribution.

Authors:  T Van Zandt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

Review 2.  Task switching: a PDP model.

Authors:  Sam J Gilbert; Tim Shallice
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 3.468

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

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

4.  Task switching.

Authors:  Stephen Monsell
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 20.229

5.  Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm.

Authors:  Mei-Ching Lien; Richard Schweickert; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Stimulus-related priming during task switching.

Authors:  Myeong-Ho Sohn; John R Anderson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-07

7.  The effects of recent practice on task switching.

Authors:  Nick Yeung; Stephen Monsell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  An evaluation of the Vincentizing method of forming group-level response time distributions.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Rouder; Paul L Speckman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-06

9.  Electrophysiological correlates of anticipatory and poststimulus components of task switching.

Authors:  Frini Karayanidis; Max Coltheart; Patricia T Michie; Karen Murphy
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.016

10.  How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing.

Authors:  S Roberts; H Pashler
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  3 in total

1.  Neural priming in human frontal cortex: multiple forms of learning reduce demands on the prefrontal executive system.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Race; Shanti Shanker; Anthony D Wagner
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  How to assess the existence of competing strategies in cognitive tasks: a primer on the fixed-point property.

Authors:  Leendert van Maanen; Ritske de Jong; Hedderik van Rijn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Three Boundary Conditions for Computing the Fixed-Point Property in Binary Mixture Data.

Authors:  Leendert van Maanen; Joaquina Couto; Mael Lebreton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 3.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.