Going, going, gone: characterizing the time-course of congruency sequence effects

被引:124
作者
Egner, Tobias [1 ,2 ]
Ely, Sora [1 ]
Grinband, Jack [3 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Ctr Cognit Neurosci, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Dept Psychol & Neurosci, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[3] Columbia Univ, Dept Radiol & Neurosci, New York, NY USA
关键词
cognitive control; congruency sequence effect; conflict adaptation; attention; expectation;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00154
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Performance on traditional selective attention tasks, like the Stroop and flanker protocols, is subject to modulation by trial history, whereby the magnitude of congruency (or conflict) effects is often found to decrease following an incongruent trial compared to a congruent one. These "congruency sequence effects" (CSEs) typically appear to reflect a mesh of memory- and attention-based processes. The current study aimed to shed new light on the nature of the attention-based contribution to CSEs, by characterizing the shape of the CSE time-course while controlling for mnemonic influences. Existing attention-based accounts of CSEs are either ambiguous in their predictions of CSE time-courses, or predict CSEs to persist or grow over the post-stimulus/response interval in anticipation of an upcoming stimulus. We gauged CSE time-courses by systematically varying inter-stimulus (Experiment 1) and response-to-stimulus (Experiment 2) intervals across a wide temporal range, in a face-word Stroop task. In spite of an exponential increase in the likelihood of stimulus appearance with increasing interval duration (i.e., an exponential hazard function), results from both experiments showed CSEs to be most pronounced at the shortest intervals, to quickly decay in magnitude with increasing interval length, and to be absent at longer intervals. These data refute the idea that attentional contributions to CSEs remain static over post-stimulus/response intervals and are incompatible with the notion that CSEs reflect expectation-guided preparatory biasing in anticipation of a forthcoming stimulus. The data are compatible, however, with the notion that attentional contributions to CSEs reflect a short-lived, phasic enhancement of attentional set in reaction to processing conflict.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   Conflict monitoring and feature overlap:: Two sources of sequential modulations [J].
Akcay, Caglar ;
Hazeltine, Eliot .
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2007, 14 (04) :742-748
[2]   Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation [J].
Alpay, Gamze ;
Goerke, Monique ;
Stuermer, Birgit .
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH-PSYCHOLOGISCHE FORSCHUNG, 2009, 73 (06) :803-816
[3]  
Appelbaum L. G., J COGN NEUR IN PRESS
[4]   Conflict monitoring and cognitive control [J].
Botvinick, MM ;
Braver, TS ;
Barch, DM ;
Carter, CS ;
Cohen, JD .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2001, 108 (03) :624-652
[5]   Unconscious inhibition separates two forms of cognitive control [J].
Boy, Frederic ;
Husain, Masud ;
Sumner, Petroc .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2010, 107 (24) :11134-11139
[6]   Opposing influences on conflict-driven adaptation in the Eriksen flanker task [J].
Bugg, Juie M. .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2008, 36 (07) :1217-1227
[7]   Sequential effects in the Simon task: Conflict adaptation or feature integration? [J].
Chen, Sufen ;
Melara, Robert D. .
BRAIN RESEARCH, 2009, 1297 :89-100
[8]   ON THE CONTROL OF AUTOMATIC PROCESSES - A PARALLEL DISTRIBUTED-PROCESSING ACCOUNT OF THE STROOP EFFECT [J].
COHEN, JD ;
DUNBAR, K ;
MCCLELLAND, JL .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1990, 97 (03) :332-361
[9]   Sequential dependencies in the Eriksen Hanker task: A direct comparison of two competing accounts [J].
Davelaar, Eddy J. ;
Stevens, Jennifer .
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2009, 16 (01) :121-126
[10]   Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information [J].
Egner, T ;
Hirsch, J .
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2005, 8 (12) :1784-1790