Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm

被引:72
作者
Philipp, Andrea M.
Jolicoeur, Pierre
Falkenstein, Michael
Koch, Iring
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Human Cognit & Brain Sci, Dept Psychol, Leipzig, Germany
[2] Univ Montreal, Dept Psychol, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
[3] Univ Dortmund, Inst Occupat Physiol, Dortmund, Germany
关键词
task switching; response selection; response execution; go/no-go; inhibition;
D O I
10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1062
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The present study used a go/no-go signal delay (GSD) to explore the role of response-related processes in task switching. A go/no-go signal was presented at either 100 ms or 1,500 ins after the stimulus. Participants were encouraged to use the GSD for response selection and preparation. The data indicate that the opportunity to select and prepare a response (i.e., long GSD) resulted in a substantial reduction of task-shift costs (Experiment 1) and n - 2 task-repetition costs (i.e., backward inhibition; Experiment 2) in the current trial. These results suggest that interference from the preceding trial can be resolved during response selection and preparation. Furthermore, the shift costs and the n - 2 repetition costs after no-go trials with long GSD (i.e., response selection but no execution) were markedly smaller than after go trials. These findings suggest that the interference that gives rise to shift costs and n - 2 repetition costs is related not solely to response selection but also to response execution. Thus, the present study demonstrates dissociable contributions of response selection and response execution to interference effects in task switching.
引用
收藏
页码:1062 / 1075
页数:14
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   The modulation of the Ne-like wave on correct responses foreshadows errors [J].
Allain, S ;
Carbonnell, L ;
Falkenstein, M ;
Burle, B ;
Vidal, F .
NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS, 2004, 372 (1-2) :161-166
[2]  
ALLPORT A, 1994, ATTENTION PERFORM, V15, P421
[3]   Comparing switch costs: Alternating runs and explicit cuing [J].
Altmann, Erik M. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2007, 33 (03) :475-483
[4]   Executive control in set switching: Residual switch cost and task-set inhibition [J].
Arbuthnott, K ;
Frank, J .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE, 2000, 54 (01) :33-41
[5]   The influence of cue type on backward inhibition [J].
Arbuthnott, KD .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2005, 31 (05) :1030-1042
[6]   The influence of cue-task association and location on switch cost and alternating-switch cost [J].
Arbuthnott, KD ;
Woodward, TS .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE, 2002, 56 (01) :18-29
[7]   Conflict monitoring and cognitive control [J].
Botvinick, MM ;
Braver, TS ;
Barch, DM ;
Carter, CS ;
Cohen, JD .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2001, 108 (03) :624-652
[8]   When the same response has different meanings: recoding the response meaning in the lateral prefrontal cortex [J].
Brass, M ;
Ruge, H ;
Meiran, N ;
Rubin, O ;
Koch, I ;
Zysset, S ;
Prinz, W ;
von Cramon, DY .
NEUROIMAGE, 2003, 20 (02) :1026-1031
[9]   A computational model of fractionated conflict-control mechanisms in task-switching [J].
Brown, Joshua W. ;
Reynolds, Jeremy R. ;
Braver, Todd S. .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 55 (01) :37-85
[10]  
De Jong R, 2000, CONTROL OF COGNITIVE PROCESSES: ATTENTION AND PERFORMANCE XVIII, P357