Literature DB >> 21874602

Cue-switch effects do not rely on the same neural systems as task-switch effects.

Wouter De Baene1, Marcel Brass.   

Abstract

The cued task-switching paradigm is often used to study cognitive control. In this paradigm, people are generally slower and make more errors when switching tasks as compared with repeating the same task. When two cues are mapped to each task, these switch costs could result from a mixture of cue-switch effects (which are thought to reflect cue encoding) and task-switch effects (which are thought to reflect task set preparation). In the behavioral literature, there has been a lively debate on the degree to which cue-switch effects and task-switch effects indeed reflect different phenomena. In the present study, we used fMRI to examine whether and to what extent the neural network underlying task-switch effects is also involved in cue-switch effects. We found task-switch but no cue-switch effects in the frequently observed preparation-related activation in fronto-parietal areas. These results suggest that the fronto-parietal areas displaying preparatory activity in task-switching paradigms are engaged in task preparation but not in cue encoding and that task preparation and cue encoding rely on completely different processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21874602     DOI: 10.3758/s13415-011-0055-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci        ISSN: 1530-7026            Impact factor:   3.282


  16 in total

1.  Attention systems and the organization of the human parietal cortex.

Authors:  M F Rushworth; T Paus; P K Sipila
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Decomposing components of task preparation with functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Marcel Brass; D Yves von Cramon
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Very clever homunculus: compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure.

Authors:  Gordon D Logan; Claus Bundesen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-10

4.  Jumping the gun: is effective preparation contingent upon anticipatory activation in task-relevant neural circuitry?

Authors:  G R Wylie; D C Javitt; J J Foxe
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2005-05-25       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process?

Authors:  Stephen Monsell; Guy A Mizon
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Separating cue encoding from target processing in the explicit task-cuing procedure: are there "true" task switch effects?

Authors:  Catherine M Arrington; Gordon D Logan; Darryl W Schneider
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Is task switching nothing but cue priming? Evidence from ERPs.

Authors:  Kerstin Jost; Ulrich Mayr; Frank Rösler
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Task-switching performance with 1:1 and 2:1 cue-task mappings: not so different after all.

Authors:  Darryl W Schneider; Gordon D Logan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Challenging a decade of brain research on task switching: brain activation in the task-switching paradigm reflects adaptation rather than reconfiguration of task sets.

Authors:  Wouter De Baene; Simone Kühn; Marcel Brass
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Advance preparation in task-switching: converging evidence from behavioral, brain activation, and model-based approaches.

Authors:  Frini Karayanidis; Sharna Jamadar; Hannes Ruge; Natalie Phillips; Andrew Heathcote; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2010-07-15
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Common and distinct neural correlates of dual-tasking and task-switching: a meta-analytic review and a neuro-cognitive processing model of human multitasking.

Authors:  Britta Worringer; Robert Langner; Iring Koch; Simon B Eickhoff; Claudia R Eickhoff; Ferdinand C Binkofski
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 3.270

2.  When predictions take control: the effect of task predictions on task switching performance.

Authors:  Wout Duthoo; Wouter De Baene; Peter Wühr; Wim Notebaert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-08-08

3.  Anterograde interference emerges along a gradient as a function of task similarity: A behavioural study.

Authors:  Raphaël Hamel; Jean-François Lepage; Pierre-Michel Bernier
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 3.698

4.  Functional Roles of Neural Preparatory Processes in a Cued Stroop Task Revealed by Linking Electrophysiology with Behavioral Performance.

Authors:  Chao Wang; Mingzhou Ding; Benzi M Kluger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Language switching decomposed through MEG and evidence from bimodal bilinguals.

Authors:  Esti Blanco-Elorrieta; Karen Emmorey; Liina Pylkkänen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 11.205

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.