A Review of the Role of Cue Processing in Task Switching

2013 ◽  
Vol 221 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Jost ◽  
Wouter De Baene ◽  
Iring Koch ◽  
Marcel Brass
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Task Switch ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Set Switching ◽  
Controversial Topic ◽  
Cue Encoding ◽  
Cue Processing

The role of cue processing has become a controversial topic in research on cognitive control using task-switching procedures. Some authors suggested a priming account to explain switch costs as a form of encoding benefit when the cue from the previous trial is repeated and hence challenged theories that attribute task-switch costs to task-set (re)configuration. A rich body of empirical evidence has evolved that indeed shows that cue-encoding repetition priming is an important component in task switching. However, these studies also demonstrate that there are usually substantial “true” task-switch costs. Here, we review this behavioral, electrophysiological, and brain imaging evidence. Moreover, we describe alternative approaches to the explicit task-cuing procedure, such as the usage of transition cues or the task-span procedure. In addition, we address issues related to the type of cue, such as cue transparency. We also discuss methodological and theoretical implications and argue that the explicit task-cuing procedure is suitable to address issues of cognitive control and task-set switching.

scholarly journals Dissociating proactively and retroactively cued task switching: a route towards neuropsychological analyses of cognitive control

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Kopp ◽  
Karl Wessel
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Response Time ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Principal Component Analyses ◽  
Frontal Lesions

Cognitive control is often examined in task switching paradigms with dissociable types of task switching. Proactive task-cuing presents switch cues, signaling both a change of task and the task to implement, which occur prior to imperative events. Proactive transition-cuing utilizes switch cues, signaling a change of task but not indicating the required task, which occur prior to imperative events. Retroactive transition-cuing utilizes switch cues, again signaling a change of task but not indicating the required task, which occur later than imperative events. Thirty-six healthy young adults participated in the study. Response time switch costs were most pronounced on proactive task-cuing, whereas perseveration errors showed highest prevalence on retroactive transition-cuing. Principal component analyses revealed evidence for two components corresponding to the distinction between proactive and retroactive task-cuing, thus implying a dissociation between proactively and retroactively cued task switching. Retroactive transitioncuing might be particularly sensitive to frontal lesions of the cortex.

scholarly journals On the connection between language control and executive control - An ERP study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-47
Author(s):  
Mathieu Declerck ◽  
Gabriela Meade ◽  
Katherine J. Midgley ◽  
Phillip J. Holcomb ◽  
Ardi Roelofs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Color Naming ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Task Switch ◽  
Control Processes ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Goal Level ◽  
Language Control ◽  
And Task

Models vary in the extent to which language control processes are domain general. Those that posit that language control is at least partially domain general insist on an overlap between language control and executive control at the goal level. To further probe whether or not language control is domain general, we conducted the first event-related potential (ERP) study that directly compares language-switch costs, as an index of language control, and task-switch costs, as an index of executive control. The language switching and task switching methodology were identical, except that the former required switching between languages (English or Spanish) whereas the latter required switching between tasks (color naming or category naming). This design allowed us to directly compare control processes at the goal level (cue-locked ERPs) and at the task performance level (picture-locked ERPs). We found no significant differences in the switch-related cue-locked and picture-locked ERP patterns across the language and task switching paradigms. These results support models of domain-general language control.

scholarly journals Inattention and task switching performance: the role of predictability, working memory load and goal neglect

2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 2090-2110
Author(s):  
Gizem Arabacı ◽  
Benjamin A. Parris
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Switching Performance ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Goal Neglect

Abstract Inattention is a symptom of many clinical disorders including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is thought to be primarily related to limitations in working memory. In two studies, we investigated the implications of inattention for task switching performance. In study one, we measured task switching performance using predictable and unpredictable conditions in adults who self-rated inattention and other ADHD-related tendencies. Tasks required proactive control and reactive control, respectively, under both high and low working memory loads. Results revealed that inattentive, but not hyperactive/impulsive traits, predicted switch costs when switching was predictable and working memory load was high. None of the ADHD traits were related to unpredictable switch costs. Study two was designed to: (1) de-confound the role of proactive control and the need to keep track of task order in the predictable task switching paradigm; (2) investigate whether goal neglect, an impairment related to working memory, could explain the relationship between inattention and predictable task switching. Results revealed that neither predictability nor the need to keep track of the task order led to the association between switch costs and inattention, but instead it was the tendency for those high in inattention to neglect preparatory proactive control, especially when reactive control options were available.

Age-related differences in task switching and task preparation: Exploring the role of task-set competition

2016 ◽  
Vol 170 ◽  
pp. 66-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Hirsch ◽  
Tina Schwarzkopp ◽  
Mathieu Declerck ◽  
Stefanie Reese ◽  
Iring Koch
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Task Preparation ◽  
Age Related ◽  
And Task

scholarly journals Neural correlates for task switching in the macaque superior colliculus

2017 ◽  
Vol 118 (4) ◽  
pp. 2156-2170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason L. Chan ◽  
Michael J. Koval ◽  
Kevin Johnston ◽  
Stefan Everling
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Superior Colliculus ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Error Rate ◽  
Nonhuman Primates ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Brain Areas ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Macaque Monkeys ◽  
Switch Costs

Successful task switching requires a network of brain areas to select, maintain, implement, and execute the appropriate task. Although frontoparietal brain areas are thought to play a critical role in task switching by selecting and encoding task rules and exerting top-down control, how brain areas closer to the execution of tasks participate in task switching is unclear. The superior colliculus (SC) integrates information from various brain areas to generate saccades and is likely influenced by task switching. Here, we investigated switch costs in nonhuman primates and their neural correlates in the activity of SC saccade-related neurons in monkeys performing cued, randomly interleaved pro- and anti-saccade trials. We predicted that behavioral switch costs would be associated with differential modulations of SC activity in trials on which the task was switched vs. repeated, with activity on the current trial resembling that associated with the task set of the previous trial when a switch occurred. We observed both error rate and reaction time switch costs and changes in the discharge rate and timing of activity in SC neurons between switch and repeat trials. These changes were present later in the task only after fixation on the cue stimuli but before saccade onset. These results further establish switch costs in macaque monkeys and suggest that SC activity is modulated by task-switching processes in a manner inconsistent with the concept of task set inertia. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Task-switching behavior and superior colliculus (SC) activity were investigated in nonhuman primates performing randomly interleaved pro- and anti-saccade tasks. Here, we report error rate and reaction time switch costs in macaque monkeys and associated differences in stimulus-related activity of saccade-related neurons in the SC. These results provide a neural correlate for task switching and suggest that the SC is modulated by task-switching processes and may reflect the completion of task set reconfiguration.

scholarly journals Action-Effect Sharing Induces Task-Set Sharing in Joint Task Switching

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Motonori Yamaguchi ◽  
Helen Joanne Wall ◽  
Bernhard Hommel
Keyword(s):  
Task Performance ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Action Effect ◽  
Action Effects ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Joint Task ◽  
Relevant Task ◽  
Set Sharing

A central issue in the study of joint task performance has been one of whether co-acting individuals perform their partner’s part of the task as if it were their own. The present study addressed this issue by using joint task switching. A pair of actors shared two tasks that were presented in a random order, whereby the relevant task and actor were cued on each trial. Responses produced action effects that were either shared or separate between co-actors. When co-actors produced separate action effects, switch costs were obtained within the same actor (i.e., when the same actor performed consecutive trials) but not between co-actors (when different actors performed consecutive trials), implying that actors did not perform their co-actor’s part. When the same action effects were shared between co-actors, however, switch costs were also obtained between co-actors, implying that actors did perform their co-actor’s part. The results indicated that shared action effects induce task-set sharing between co-acting individuals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document