Search

Cues help in retrieving and implementing task-sets, that are actual representations of the to-be performed task in working memory. However, whereas previous studies revealed that the effectiveness of selecting and implementing task-sets based on cues depends on the type of cue (i.e., transparent words vs. arbitrary shapes), it is still unclear which characteristics of cues are responsible for these differences and whether the impact of the cue is bound to task-set retrieval only or also impacts task-set representations. For instance, the amount of interference during actual task performance has been reported to alter dependent on cue type as do preparation gains such as the reduction of switch cost. To investigate the effectiveness of cue characteristics (i.e., cue transparency and cue format), we manipulated those within- and between-participants in three experiments. Main dependent measures were switch costs in reaction times and error rates that occur when participants have to switch task-sets, and thus update working memory content. Our results consistently show beneficial effects of transparent cues for the reduction of switch cost. The influence of cue format was manifest in within-participants manipulation only and was mainly found in error rates. Overall, our data suggest that the amount of interference experienced in actual task performance can be significantly modulated dependent on cue type, suggesting flexible adaptation of the cognitive system to contextual information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many researchers have employed secondary tasks, which have to be performed in parallel with a primary task requirement, to examine how successful task selection is accomplished in the context of task switching. The influence of such a secondary task on the observed switch cost (i.e., the cost arising when the currently relevant task differs from the task performed most recently) is seen as indicative that cognitive processes such as self-instruction are involved. Most secondary tasks chosen so far have required the repeated utterance of a word or syllable or a rhythmic movement of the foot. In the present study, we manipulated the dynamics of the to-be-performed secondary task (i.e., a repeated utterance or movement, or a static task that involved similar muscles—holding a spattle in the mouth or pressing keys). Additionally, we tested for modality-specific influences by asking participants to perform a dynamic or nondynamic (i.e., static) secondary task with two effector systems, namely oral and manual. Overall, our secondary tasks led to a reduced (rather than an increased) switch cost, as compared to a control condition without any secondary task. This reduction in switch cost was dependent on the secondary-task dynamics but independent of the effectors involved, showing larger switch-cost reductions for dynamic secondary tasks. To explain this finding, we suggest that performing secondary tasks interferes with the formation of episodic-memory traces that would lead to retrieval benefits in the case of a task repetition, so that our reduced task-switch costs actually represent reduced repetition benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In one task-switching experiment, we compared bilinguals and monolinguals to explore the reliability of the bilingualism effect on the n-2 repetition cost. In a second task-switching experiment, we tested another group of bilinguals and monolinguals and measured both the n-1 shift cost and the n-2 repetition cost to test the hypothesis that bilingualism should confer a general greater efficiency of the executive control functioning. According to this hypothesis, we expected a reduced n-1 shift cost and an enhanced n-2 repetition cost for bilinguals compared to monolinguals. However, we did not observe such results. Our findings suggest that previous results cannot be replicated and that the n-2 repetition cost is another index that shows no reliable bilingualism effect. Finally, we observed a negative correlation between the two switch costs among bilinguals only. This finding may suggest that the two groups employ different strategies to cope with interference in task-switching paradigms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate interference between declarative and procedural representations in working memory (WM). Declarative representations are objects of thought, whereas procedural representations provide the (cognitive) actions to work upon these objects. In eight dual-task experiments we varied the number of representations to be maintained in WM (memory load). In Experiments 1–4, we varied declarative and procedural load separately in the two tasks used. In Experiments 5–8, only declarative or procedural load was manipulated in both tasks employed. We measured how much performance in the currently relevant task was impaired by increasing the load in the currently irrelevant task. These cross-task load effects were larger for Experiment 5–8 compared to Experiment 1–4. Yet, in task-switch trials we also obtained cross-task load effects in Experiment 1–4. Our findings support the distinction of declarative and procedural WM as largely independent sub-systems or distinct representational spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Performance of task sequences is assumed to rely on activation and inhibition of tasks. An empirical marker of task inhibition is the so-called n - 2 repetition cost, which is assessed by comparing performance in trial n - 2 task repetitions (i.e., ABA) with that in n - 2 task switches (i.e., CBA). Current theoretical accounts assume that inhibition acts on the level of task representations (i.e., task sets). However, another potential target of task inhibition could be the representation of the task cue. To decide between these two alternatives, the authors used a 2: 1 cue-to-task mapping design. They found significant n - 2 task repetition costs both with n - 2 cue repetitions and n - 2 cue switches. These costs were about equal (Experiment 1), and this data pattern was found for both short and long cuing intervals (Experiment 2). Together, the data suggest that task inhibition acts on task sets and not on cue representations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the present study was to examine the contribution of overlapping response sets to the occurrence of task inhibition, measured as n-2 task repetition cost. We had subjects switch among four tasks. Three tasks overlapped on both stimulus set and response set. A fourth, neutral, univalent task never overlapped on the stimulus set but, across three experiments, varied in terms of the degree of overlap in the response set. We found that overlap in response set affects task inhibition. We suggest that response set overlap increases the competition among tasks and, thus, triggers task inhibition to resolve this competition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a study of the formation of representations of task sequences and its influence on task inhibition, participants first performed tasks in a predictable sequence (e.g., ABACBC) and then performed the tasks in a random sequence. Half of the participants were explicitly instructed about the predictable sequence, whereas the other participants did not receive these instructions. Task-sequence learning was inferred from shorter reaction times (RTs) in predictable relative to random sequences. Persisting inhibition of competing tasks was indicated by increased RTs in n− 2 task repetitions (e.g., AB A) compared with n− 2 nonrepetitions (e.g., CB A). The results show task-sequence learning for both groups. However, task inhibition was reduced in predictable relative to random sequences among instructed-learning participants who formed an explicit representation of the task sequence, whereas sequence learning and task inhibition were independent in the noninstructed group. We hypothesize that the explicit instructions led to chunking of the task sequence, and that n− 2 repetitions served as chunk points (ABA-CBC), so that within-chunk facilitation modulated the inhibition effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]